How much money was awarded in case 4781330?

Compensation: $370.44 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4781330?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice. Related themes: Healthy homes, Exemplary damages, Mould & damp, Leaks.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4781330?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11054864-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 4781330?

Compensation: $370.44 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4781330?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice. Related themes: Healthy homes, Exemplary damages, Mould & damp, Leaks.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4781330?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11054864-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

202 Colac Foreshore Road, Colac Bay, RD 1, Riverton Tenancy Tribunal Case 4781330 — 14-day notice

Q: What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4781330?

The tribunal order states: Rewiti Stewart Bull is to provide his bank account details to Oraka-Aparima

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4781330. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
details to Oraka-Aparima Runaka Incorporated within 7 working days of this order, to allow the payment of compensation o	$370.44		details to Oraka-Aparima Runaka Incorporated within 7 working days of this order, to allow the payment of compensation o

Rewiti Stewart Bull is to provide his bank account details to Oraka-Aparima Runaka Incorporated within 7 working days of this order, to allow the payment of compensation of $370.44 ordered by Adjudicator Manhire on 19 March 2024 to be made to him.

The rubbish referred to in the 19 March 2024 order has been removed by the tenant. The tenant does not seek any compensation for the rubbish removal and that issue is resolved.

I did not consider the issue of the compensation for lawn mowing. If the tenant wishes to pursue this claim, he must file an application and go through the proper process. The

Reasons

for these decisions are set out below.

The tenants claim for the appeal costs are dismissed.

The parties mutually consent to the following orders: a) The reinforcement bars from the former fence are to be cut to ground level on or before 25 November 2024 b) The landlord will raise with the executive of Oraka-Aparima Runaka Incorporated the possibility of replacing the fencing alongside the road/driveway between the marae and the marae house. The tenant has not specified any type of fence, just one that ensures the separation of the driveway for the children at his home and the marae. c) For completeness, the tenant’s home is called the “marae house,” which is directly alongside the marae separated by a driveway/short private road. d) The landlord will fix the front fence line/panels that runs along the roadway. The tenant provided photos of the fence leaning forward and being held together by a leather belt placed by the tenant. The front fencing is to be repaired on or before 25 November 2024. e) The tenant provided a photo of wiring hanging out of the front eves of the house by the front door. The tenant said that the wiring was “live” and so an electrician came and insulated the hanging wiring. The electrician said months ago that he would be coming back to remove the wiring. The parties agree that an electrician is to return and confirm whether the wiring is “live’ and remove the hanging wiring on or before 25 November 2024. f) Despite extensive working being carried out on the property the tenant claims that during heavy winds and rain the washing, bathroom, and bedroom windows leak. The parties have agreed that a tradesperson will come and investigate the claim and remedy as required. g) The Healthy Homes Assessment will be carried out as a matter of importance. The landlord is to give the tenant 48 hours written (and emailed) notice of the assessors visit. h) Communication between the parties has been problematic. The landlord is to communicate all notice requirements via email to rewiti.bull@gmail.com i) The tenant is to communicate whether verbally or in writing with Mr Iain MacCallum, at Iain.Maccallum@orakaaparima.org.nz . Mr Mac Callum is a property manager for the landlord and is known to the tenant. j) Mr Phillip Fluerty is not to be involved in any maintenance or repairs to the tenant’s home (AKA the marae house). k) All ongoing inspections are to be three monthly. The first inspection is to be carried out within the next 7 days, after giving 48 hours’ notice to the tenant. The next inspections will be on the week of 17 February 2025, and 19 May 2025, 18 August 2025, and 20 th November 2025. l) Mr Iain MacCallum and one other person from his office will do the inspections. m) The tenant will provide his bank account details to the landlord to enable them to pay the compensation of $370.44 order by Adjudicator Manhire in his order 19 March 2024. Reasons:

Both parties attended the hearing.

This is a rehearing after a successful appeal to the District Court solely on the claim of retaliatory notice. The landlord has no claims before the Tribunal.

The tenant has a few other claims of compensation he seeks today and in the interests of resolving all ongoing issues I will consider these additional claims as they arise. The landlord is not opposed to the course of action, and simply seeks to move on and work with the tenant to resolve all issues with the tenancy. Background:

On 13 January 2024, the tenant filed an application with the Tenancy services claiming the following: -Failure to maintain s45 Residential tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”) -Retaliatory Notice

This was a tenancy that commenced on 24 September 2015.

A hearing was heard by Adjudicator Manhire 0n 19 March 2024 and the following was ordered: -Work order which had a completion date of 23 April 2024 -A finding of failure to maintain the property and an award of $350.00 compensation for the breach. Adjudicator Manhire expressly stated that he was not awarding exemplary damages under the RTA for the breach of s45 RTA but $350 compensation to reflect the breach. -Adjudicator Manhire stated that he accepted there were numerous challenges for the landlord, but other options were available to the landlord for ensuring extractor fans and draught issues were resolved. -The retaliatory notice claim was dismissed, as Adjudicator Manhire found that the tenant had not filed his application with Tenancy Services within the specified time frame for a declaration that the notice to terminate is of no effect. -Reimbursement of the filing fee and granting suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details. -After that hearing the tenant appealed to the District court on 28 March 2024 against Adjudicator Manhire’s decision to dismiss the retaliatory notice claim due to it being out of time. -The appeal was heard in the Invercargill District Court on 1 July 2024. In a written decision of His Honour Judge Neave dated 11 th September 2024, the Court allowed the appeal and remitted it back to the Tenancy Tribunal to determine the Retaliatory Notice claim only.

The matter was set down before me on 11 November 2024 to consider the issue of Retaliatory notice. Initially there was some confusion on the tenant’s behalf as he thought all the claims were to be revisited.

At this hearing I am dealing with the Retaliatory Notice claim.

However, I sought to have a discussion with the parties regarding any additional issues that remain. Outstanding issues arising from the work order:

There were a number of items on the work order that Adjudicator Manhire set out in his order, requiring them to be fixed before 23 April 2024.

The landlord has provided the Tribunal with invoices that total $81,060.02 and documentation relating to the repairs and maintenance carried out on the tenant’s home before 23 April 2024.

I am impressed with the work that has been carried out by the landlord. The tenant confirmed that the property is now in a good condition, despite a few ongoing issues he raised.

The tenant said there are two things not completed and one is the payment of the compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee, and the other was the removal of the rubbish on the property.

The tenant accepted that the landlord had tried to pay the compensation, but he had refused to give them his bank account details to transfer the money until the appeal and rehearing took place.

At that time, the tenant thought that Adjudicator Manhire’s order of 19 March 2024 had been quashed and that this hearing was to relitigate all claims. Once I read out the appeal decision and the tenant’s appeal application, the tenant conceded that he had not sought to appeal the failure to maintain claim. His only point on appeal was the dismissing of the retaliatory notice claim due to an incorrect assumption that the tenant filed his application outside of time.

The tenant will provide his bank account details, as part of the consent/agreement as set out below under paragraph “m,” to enable the payment of the compensation to be made.

The rubbish was eventually removed by the tenant. The tenant is not seeking to claim compensation for the removal of the rubbish. Additional claims and compensation sought at this hearing:

The tenant sought the following from this hearing: a) Finding of retaliatory notice on behalf of the landlord after issuing a 14 day notice to the landlord. b) Exemplary damages for the breach. c) Compensation of $5200.00 for the repayment of $20.00 per week paid each week to the landlord by the tenant since 2015 for the lawns to be mowed. d) $200.00 Filing fee for District Court appeal. Consent/agreement of parties reflected in this order:

The parties and the Tribunal have discussed a number of issues today and as a result of genuine good will and a desire to work together on outstanding issues the parties have consented to the following: a) The reinforcement bars from the former fence are to be cut to ground level on or before 25 November 2024 b) The landlord will raise with the executive of Oraka-Aparima Runaka Incorporated the possibility of replacing the fencing alongside the road/driveway between the marae and the marae house. The tenant is not specifying any type of fence, just one that ensures the separation of the driveway for the children at his home and the marae. c) For completeness, the tenant’s home is called the “marae house,” which is directly alongside the marae separated by a driveway/short private road. d) The landlord will fix the front fence line/panels that runs along the roadway. The tenant provided photos of the fence leaning forward and being held together by a leather belt placed by the tenant. The front fencing is to be repaired on or before 25 November 2024. e) The tenant provided a photo of wiring hanging out of the front eves of the house by the front door. The tenant said that the wiring was “live” and so an electrician came and insulated the hanging wiring. The electrician said months ago that he would be coming back to remove the wiring. The parties agree that an electrician is to return and confirm whether the wiring is “live’ and remove the hanging wiring on or before 25 November 2024. f) Despite extensive working being carried out on the property the tenant claims that during heavy winds and rain the washing, bathroom, and bedroom windows leak. The parties have agreed that a tradesperson will come and investigate the claim and remedy as required. g) The Healthy Homes Assessment will be carried out as a matter of importance. The landlord is to give the tenant 48 hours written (and emailed) notice of the assessors visit. h) Communication between the parties has been problematic. The landlord is to communicate all notice requirements via email to rewiti.bull@gmail.com i) The tenant is to communicate whether verbally or in writing with Mr Iain MacCallum, at Iain.Maccallum@orakaaparima.org.nz . Mr Mac Callum is a property manager for the landlord and is known to the tenant. j) Mr Phillip Fluerty is not to be involved in any maintenance or repairs to the tenant’s home (AKA the marae house). k) All ongoing inspections are to be three monthly. The first inspection is to be carried out within the next 7 days, after giving 48 hours’ notice to the tenant. The next inspections will be on the week of 17 February 2025, and 19 May 2025, 18 August 2025, and 20 th November 2025. l) Mr Iain MacCallum and one other person from his office will do the inspections. m) The tenant will provide his bank account details to the landlord to enable them to pay the compensation of $370.44 order by Adjudicator Manhire in his order 19 March 2024. Tenant’s claims: Retaliatory Notice:

On 26 November 2023 , the landlord gave the tenant a notice ending the tenancy on 29 January 2024. The tenant claims the notice is retaliatory.

The tenant had advised the property manager by a letter dated 5 October 2023 of the list of things that needed fixing on the property. The list included the following: -Dirty contaminated water supply -Lower water pressure -Leaking kitchen windows, paint pealing -Kitchen access door handles broken. -Fireplace broken. -Front access gates broken. -Spouting and downpipes snapped, causing water leaks and mould. -Iron fence broken and health and safe concern. -Concrete fence on lean and dangerous. -Varnish flaking off doors. -Rubbish on driveway. -No letterbox. -Facia and soffit rotten.

The tenant says that this was a 14 day notice to remedy which he gave to the property manager at an inspection.

The property manager says she was never given a “14 day notice”. I accept that it was not a “proper 14 day notice” in accordance with the RTA. Regardless it was clear notice to the landlord of the need to maintain and repair the property.

Discussions were had with the parties and a short while later the notice to terminate was given to the tenant.

The landlord subsequently withdrawn the notice to vacate and does not seek to terminate the tenancy at the hearing.

The landlord advised that rather than the notice being in retaliation for the notice given of the repairs, it was a reality check to review the feasibility of renting the property.

The landlord advised that they are conducting an overall review of their property portfolio and considering the ongoing viability of all 5 rental properties they own.

For a notice to be declared retaliatory, the tenant must prove that in terminating the tenancy, the landlord was motivated wholly or partly by the tenant exercising a right under the tenancy agreement or any Act, or by any complaint against the landlord. See section 54(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Giving a termination notice which is declared to be retaliatory is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded, up to a maximum of $6,500.00. See section 54(2), (3) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

I do not find that the landlord issued the notice to terminate as a retaliatory notice for the tenant wanting repairs and maintenance for the home. I do not find they have committed an unlawful act.

This property does/did have major repairs and cost involved with that. The landlord is reviewing the long term viability of the rentals.

The tenancy is not terminating, and the tenant is still in the property. Compensation for lawn mowing costs:

The tenant said that when his tenancy began in 2015, he was paying $130 weekly rent. In 2017 he was still paying $130.00 for rent and $20.00 per week to pay for the lawns to be mowed.

The lawns were mowed for approximately one year and then it stopped, but the tenant continued to pay the extra $20.00 per week despite not getting the service he paid for.

The tenant seeks compensation to cover the additional money he paid for the lawns to be mowed when they were not mowed. He seeks $5200.00 in compensation, which is $20 per week x 4=$80 x 12 =$960 per year. $5200 equates to roughly 5.5 years payments).

I have not been provided with proof that the tenant did make extra payments for the lawns and what the arrangements were. Furthermore, when the lawns stopped being mowed and what steps the tenant took to address the issue with the landlord.

I do not have enough information to make this assessment and so am not in a position to make a determination. The landlord had no prior notice of this claim to refute it.

I am not considering this claim. If the tenant wishes to pursue the claim he must file a proper application with Tenancy tribunal. District Court filing fee:

The Tribunal has limited power to award costs to or against any party to proceedings before it. See s102(1) RTA. There is very limited ground, which do not apply in this case, where the Tribunal will award costs.

The tenants claim for the appeal costs to be reimbursement are dismissed.

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4781330. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
details to Oraka-Aparima Runaka Incorporated within 7 working days of this order, to allow the payment of compensation o	$370.44		details to Oraka-Aparima Runaka Incorporated within 7 working days of this order, to allow the payment of compensation o