What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4798454?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Jacinta Denley at Flat 7, 24 London Street, Richmond,

How much money was awarded in case 4798454?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4798454?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4798454?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10243410-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4798454?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Jacinta Denley at Flat 7, 24 London Street, Richmond,

How much money was awarded in case 4798454?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4798454?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4798454?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10243410-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Flat 7, 24 London Street, Richmond, Christchurch 8013 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4798454 — 14-day notice

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Mr Sharp represented the landlord.

The tenant has applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the landlord’s obligations. Law

The Tribunal may terminate a tenancy for breach where, due to the nature or extent of the breach, it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate.

Where the breach is capable of remedy, the tenant must first serve a notice on the landlord requiring them to remedy the breach within at least 14 days and establish that they have failed to do so. Background and Discussion

This tenancy began in May 2022 for a one-year fixed term.

It was renewed in May 2023 for another one-year fixed term ending on 28 May 2024.

The tenant has found another rental and wants to end this tenancy on 10 May.

She informed the landlord on 18 April of her intentions, but the landlord is not willing to release her early from the tenancy other than on the usual break lease terms.

When the tenant moved in, there was damage around the rangehood indicating that water was leaking into the premises from above.

The landlord produced an invoice dated 3 August 2022 referring to the repair of a roof leak.

Mr Sharp said that the landlord was waiting to ensure that the leak had been fixed before making good the damage around the rangehood.

Copies of messages between the parties show that the tenant was complaining about the damage during 2023. She was concerned about paint flaking from the ceiling onto the stove and potentially falling into food that was being cooked on the stove. She also had concerns about the rangehood being insecurely fixed to the wall.

Messages from the property manager assured her that a contractor had been engaged to deal with the problem and that the necessary work would be done once it was confirmed that there was no leak.

The tenant raised other maintenance issues, such as the shower head, which the landlord did not attend to. The tenant had to replace the shower head herself.

On 16 January 2024 the tenant served a breach notice on the landlord requiring them to remedy the problems with the rangehood and the ceiling.

A contractor attended on 13 February 2024 and removed the flaking paint, plastered and painted.

An unsigned statement from the contractors who fixed the leak, says that in August 2023 they attended the premises and found that there was no danger of the ceiling collapsing.

At no time did the landlord inform the tenant that there was no need for any repair or that no repair would be done.

The tenant has just recently provided a report from a builder itemising numerous maintenance issues affecting the premises and the building, some of which are, potentially, health and safety and healthy homes breaches.

The most striking thing about this case is the length of time that it has taken for the landlord to deal with the damage that the landlord has been aware of since May 2022 and which the tenant has been actively complaining about since at least as long ago as July 2023.

Even after the tenant served a breach notice the landlord did not comply with it within 14 days.

The property manager led the tenant to believe that the damage would be repaired but it appears that the landlord had no intention of carrying out the repair until they received the breach notice.

The maintenance issue is not, objectively, at the more serious end of the scale, but I accept that it caused the tenant considerable upset and stress. I also accept that there was a real risk of paint falling into the tenant’s food.

As well as the landlord’s prolonged failure to carry out the repair, there have been other examples of the landlord’s failure to comply with their maintenance obligations.

The recent report from the tenant’s builder is also concerning. The landlord’s healthy homes statements appear to relate back to a healthy homes assessment in February 2021, well before this tenancy began. Plainly, such an assessment should be done at the time of each healthy homes statement.

The relevant factors here are the length of time it has taken the landlord to carry out the repair while leading the tenant to believe that it was in hand, the distress that this caused the tenant, the fact that the tenancy is nearly at an end and the tenant has given the landlord three weeks’ notice of her intention to vacate the premises. In normal circumstances, the landlord would be entitled to four weeks’ notice ending on or after the contractual termination date. The practical effect of an early termination on the landlord is therefore minimal.

I note as well that the tenant could have claimed compensation and exemplary damages but has chosen not to do so.

In all the circumstances I find that it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy. In plain language, I find that it is fair to terminate the tenancy and I have made an order to that effect. Filing Fee

Because the tenant has succeeded with her claim, the landlord must pay the filing fee.

Reasons