What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4754192?

The tribunal order states: Aphrodite Oriwia Mareikura Haimona must pay Precision Property Management

How much money was awarded in case 4754192?

Compensation: $1,000.00 awarded to tenant; Rent Arrears: $4,171.43 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4754192?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4754192?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9848273-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4754192?

The tribunal order states: Aphrodite Oriwia Mareikura Haimona must pay Precision Property Management

How much money was awarded in case 4754192?

Compensation: $1,000.00 awarded to tenant; Rent Arrears: $4,171.43 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4754192?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4754192?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9848273-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

25 Tihi Road, Springfield, Rotorua 3015 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4754192 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4754192 — net $531.43 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears as of end of tenancy	$4,171.43		Rent arrears as of end of tenancy
Compensation		$1,000.00	Compensation
Total award	$4,171.43	$1,000.00
Net award	$531.43
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$531.43

Order

Aphrodite Oriwia Mareikura Haimona must pay Precision Property Management Limited As Agent For Henry And Rebecca Sharp And Dimock $531.43 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,640.00 (3545316-011) to Precision Property Management Limited As Agent For Henry And Rebecca Sharp And Dimock immediately.

Reasons

The Tribunal must consider applications filed by both the tenant and landlord.
Both parties appeared at the hearing today. DescriptionLandlordTenant Rent arrears as of end of tenancy$4,171.43 Compensation $1,000.00 Total award$4,171.43$1,000.00 Net award$3,171.43 Minus bond- $2,640.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$531.43
The tenant seeks compensation in relation to a water leak at the premises, and the landlord seeks an order for rent arrears. The tenancy has ended, so I need to deal with the bond also.

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations.
That includes a requirement that the party bringing the claim (the applicant), establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. The balance of probabilities means more likely than un-likely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely.

LANDLORDS CLAIM

The landlord has applied for an order that the tenant pay rent arrears of $4,171.43, being rent arrears to 18 December 2023, the final day of the tenancy.
The landlord has provided the Tribunal with a rent ledger. I have no reason to consider that record to be incorrect. The tenant does not dispute the rent ledger as being accurate, the tenant is simply seeking to have her cross application considered in the mix of what is owed.
As I advised at the hearing, I will order the full rent arrears to be paid, but will need to deduct the bond and any compensation ordered to the tenant for the water leak.

TENANTS CLAIM

The tenant seeks compensation in relation to a water leak at the house.
There is no dispute that there was a water leak in the ceiling space above the kitchen. As I understand matters, the history is as follows: a. There was a previous leak in the pipe above the kitchen. I am not certain of the date of that original leak. b. The tenant reported a further leak to the landlord on 4 August 2023. c. The landlord instructed a plumber who attended that day, but I understand the leak was fixed the following day. d. In the course of locating and fixing the leak, the plumber needed to remove a section of plasterboard above the kitchen. e. On 24 August 2023 the tenant reported a further leak. f. The landlord again instructed a plumber that same day.
At the hearing today, the tenant said there was a leak in the ceiling above the kitchen, which caused flooding. The tenant says that the landlord did send someone to undertake the repair, but there were still issues in relation to the ceiling, with flaking of plaster where the plasterboard had been removed. The tenant seeks $5,500 in compensation in relation to being unable to use the kitchen and inconvenience.
The landlord accepts that there were leaks in the ceiling, and set out the history in relation to the leaks. However the landlord disputes that the kitchen or any other room was unusable, the landlord considers that no compensation should be provided.
I note that at the hearing the tenant showed videos of the water leak and some flakes of plaster on the kitchen bench and floor. I accept that there was some water shown particularly on the kitchen bench, and also small flakes of plaster, but my overall assessment is that this was limited and the effect was modest.
I note also that the tenancy has ended. The landlord gave a notice terminating the tenancy on the ground of wanting to undertake significant works in the tenancy. At the hearing the landlord provided photographs taken on the day of the hearing, which show that the kitchen cabinetry has been removed from the premises.

COMPENSATION

With any claim for compensation, to receive an order the party must incur a loss. In short the compensation is intended as best money can do, to compensate for the actual loss incurred.
In this case, there is no evidence to show that the water leak was caused from negligence etc, I accept that this is a case of existing plumbing fixtures breaking down, causing a leak, and needing repair or replacement. Unfortunately that sort of situation is not particularly uncommon, and it does not represent a breach of the landlords maintenance obligation, it is just the reality that all things that go to make up a house have a limited life span.
When I consider the evidence, I find that when the tenant raised the issue of leaks, the landlord has acted efficiently with getting a plumber on site. I recognise also that there were issues with one plumber intruding on the privacy of the tenant.
However there has been a water leak, and I accept this has caused inconvenience to the tenant. It is also the case that the tenant was paying rental for a kitchen that had a contiguous ceiling, and at the end of the tenancy she was not getting that.
This is a case where the tenant should be compensated for her losses, which include a reduction in the amenity / quality of the tenancy she was paying rent for, as well as the inconvenience that has arisen in dealing with the leak, and in relation to tradespeople and the owner needing to come to the premises to address the leak.
The difficultly is working out what a fair level of compensation would be. This is not a case where the tenant is out of pocket by a defined amount. Rather what I must do, is step back and consider all of the evidence, and decide what a fair amount of compensation would be. Having done that, I have concluded that a fair level of compensation would be $1,000.00. That is about one and a half weeks or rental. The tenant must be compensated for her loss and inconvenience, but I also agree with the landlord that the house would otherwise have been useable, so the tenant would have had the benefit of the other areas in the house. I therefore order $1,000.00 of compensation, to be deducted from the rent arrears.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4754192 — net $531.43 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears as of end of tenancy	$4,171.43		Rent arrears as of end of tenancy
Compensation		$1,000.00	Compensation
Total award	$4,171.43	$1,000.00
Net award	$531.43
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$531.43

Order

Aphrodite Oriwia Mareikura Haimona must pay Precision Property Management Limited As Agent For Henry And Rebecca Sharp And Dimock $531.43 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,640.00 (3545316-011) to Precision Property Management Limited As Agent For Henry And Rebecca Sharp And Dimock immediately.

Reasons

The Tribunal must consider applications filed by both the tenant and landlord.
Both parties appeared at the hearing today. DescriptionLandlordTenant Rent arrears as of end of tenancy$4,171.43 Compensation $1,000.00 Total award$4,171.43$1,000.00 Net award$3,171.43 Minus bond- $2,640.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$531.43
The tenant seeks compensation in relation to a water leak at the premises, and the landlord seeks an order for rent arrears. The tenancy has ended, so I need to deal with the bond also.

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations.
That includes a requirement that the party bringing the claim (the applicant), establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. The balance of probabilities means more likely than un-likely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely.

LANDLORDS CLAIM

The landlord has applied for an order that the tenant pay rent arrears of $4,171.43, being rent arrears to 18 December 2023, the final day of the tenancy.
The landlord has provided the Tribunal with a rent ledger. I have no reason to consider that record to be incorrect. The tenant does not dispute the rent ledger as being accurate, the tenant is simply seeking to have her cross application considered in the mix of what is owed.
As I advised at the hearing, I will order the full rent arrears to be paid, but will need to deduct the bond and any compensation ordered to the tenant for the water leak.

TENANTS CLAIM

The tenant seeks compensation in relation to a water leak at the house.
There is no dispute that there was a water leak in the ceiling space above the kitchen. As I understand matters, the history is as follows: a. There was a previous leak in the pipe above the kitchen. I am not certain of the date of that original leak. b. The tenant reported a further leak to the landlord on 4 August 2023. c. The landlord instructed a plumber who attended that day, but I understand the leak was fixed the following day. d. In the course of locating and fixing the leak, the plumber needed to remove a section of plasterboard above the kitchen. e. On 24 August 2023 the tenant reported a further leak. f. The landlord again instructed a plumber that same day.
At the hearing today, the tenant said there was a leak in the ceiling above the kitchen, which caused flooding. The tenant says that the landlord did send someone to undertake the repair, but there were still issues in relation to the ceiling, with flaking of plaster where the plasterboard had been removed. The tenant seeks $5,500 in compensation in relation to being unable to use the kitchen and inconvenience.
The landlord accepts that there were leaks in the ceiling, and set out the history in relation to the leaks. However the landlord disputes that the kitchen or any other room was unusable, the landlord considers that no compensation should be provided.
I note that at the hearing the tenant showed videos of the water leak and some flakes of plaster on the kitchen bench and floor. I accept that there was some water shown particularly on the kitchen bench, and also small flakes of plaster, but my overall assessment is that this was limited and the effect was modest.
I note also that the tenancy has ended. The landlord gave a notice terminating the tenancy on the ground of wanting to undertake significant works in the tenancy. At the hearing the landlord provided photographs taken on the day of the hearing, which show that the kitchen cabinetry has been removed from the premises.

COMPENSATION

With any claim for compensation, to receive an order the party must incur a loss. In short the compensation is intended as best money can do, to compensate for the actual loss incurred.
In this case, there is no evidence to show that the water leak was caused from negligence etc, I accept that this is a case of existing plumbing fixtures breaking down, causing a leak, and needing repair or replacement. Unfortunately that sort of situation is not particularly uncommon, and it does not represent a breach of the landlords maintenance obligation, it is just the reality that all things that go to make up a house have a limited life span.
When I consider the evidence, I find that when the tenant raised the issue of leaks, the landlord has acted efficiently with getting a plumber on site. I recognise also that there were issues with one plumber intruding on the privacy of the tenant.
However there has been a water leak, and I accept this has caused inconvenience to the tenant. It is also the case that the tenant was paying rental for a kitchen that had a contiguous ceiling, and at the end of the tenancy she was not getting that.
This is a case where the tenant should be compensated for her losses, which include a reduction in the amenity / quality of the tenancy she was paying rent for, as well as the inconvenience that has arisen in dealing with the leak, and in relation to tradespeople and the owner needing to come to the premises to address the leak.
The difficultly is working out what a fair level of compensation would be. This is not a case where the tenant is out of pocket by a defined amount. Rather what I must do, is step back and consider all of the evidence, and decide what a fair amount of compensation would be. Having done that, I have concluded that a fair level of compensation would be $1,000.00. That is about one and a half weeks or rental. The tenant must be compensated for her loss and inconvenience, but I also agree with the landlord that the house would otherwise have been useable, so the tenant would have had the benefit of the other areas in the house. I therefore order $1,000.00 of compensation, to be deducted from the rent arrears.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4754192 — Rent arrears at 25 Tihi Road, Springfield, Rotorua 3015

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4754192 — Rent arrears at 25 Tihi Road, Springfield, Rotorua 3015

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

LANDLORDS CLAIM

TENANTS CLAIM

COMPENSATION

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

LANDLORDS CLAIM

TENANTS CLAIM

COMPENSATION

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions