What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4884681?

The tribunal order states: Daffodil Property Management Limited must pay Jessica Coughlan and Hayley

How much money was awarded in case 4884681?

Compensation: Bathroom Rail: $200.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: Bedroom walls and ceil…: $3,000.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: Windows: $1,000.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant; Rent Arrears: $3,600.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4884681?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4884681?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10671388-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4884681?

The tribunal order states: Daffodil Property Management Limited must pay Jessica Coughlan and Hayley

How much money was awarded in case 4884681?

Compensation: Bathroom Rail: $200.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: Bedroom walls and ceil…: $3,000.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: Windows: $1,000.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant; Rent Arrears: $3,600.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4884681?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4884681?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10671388-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

44 Maxwell Street, Riccarton, Christchurch 8041 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4884681 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4884681 — net $620.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears for the period ending 7 August 2024	$3,600.00		Rent arrears for the period ending 7 August 2024
Compensation: Windows		$1,000.00	Windows
Compensation: Bedroom walls and ceiling		$3,000.00	Bedroom walls and ceiling
Compensation: Bathroom rail		$200.00	Bathroom rail
Filing fee reimbursement		$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Total award	$3,600.00	$4,220.44
Net award		$620.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant		$620.44

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4884681 — net $620.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears for the period ending 7 August 2024	$3,600.00		Rent arrears for the period ending 7 August 2024
Compensation: Windows		$1,000.00	Windows
Compensation: Bedroom walls and ceiling		$3,000.00	Bedroom walls and ceiling
Compensation: Bathroom rail		$200.00	Bathroom rail
Filing fee reimbursement		$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Total award	$3,600.00	$4,220.44
Net award		$620.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant		$620.44

Order

Daffodil Property Management Limited must pay Jessica Coughlan and Hayley Coughlan $620.44 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
Application number 4903594 is withdrawn with the consent of the landlord.
The landlord’s application for termination of the tenancy is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Mr Biswas represented the landlord company. Mr Biswas is the sole director and shareholder of the landlord company.
The parties have a tenancy of the premises commencing on 24 February 2022. The current rent payable for the tenancy is $910.00. The landlord does not own the premises. Mr Biswas leases the premises from the owner and his company sublets it to these tenants.
On 9 May 2024 the landlord applied for an order terminating the tenancy for non- payment of rent and a rent arrears order. The tenants filed a cross application on 31 May for compensation for failure by the landlord to repair and maintain the premises. The landlord filed another application (4903594) on 30 May 2024 also seeking termination of the tenancy and a rent arrears order. However, Mr Biswas agreed at the hearing that this application can be withdrawn.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenants fell into arrears with rent in January 2024. The parties came to an agreement whereby the tenants would pay an additional $50.00 per week towards the arrears. Unfortunately, the tenants missed a payment due on 2 May 2024 and Mr Biswas emailed them on 9 May telling them that because they are in breach of the agreement the agreement is cancelled. He also filed this application.
The amount of arrears owing to the end of this rent week (7 August 2024) has been established by the production of a rent record. The tenants dispute the amount claimed believing it was not as high as claimed but they did not provide any evidence to support their belief.

Did the landlord comply with their obligations regarding maintenance and repairs?

Section 45(1)(b) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act) provides that the landlord must provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair. Once the landlord becomes aware of the need for repairs, the obligation in section 45(1)(b) requires those repairs to be attended to in a timely manner. What time frame is reasonable depends not only on the gravity of the problem but also on the objective evidence of the attempts made by the landlord to investigate, and put right, whatever the problem may be.
The tenants claim that the landlord has failed to repair at all or adequately: issues with the living room, kitchen and a bedroom window; large cracks in the walls and ceiling of a bedroom; and, the bathroom curtain rail which they say would fall due to being inadequately attached when the bathroom was renovated soon after the tenancy commenced. Windows
The living room corner window was in a poor state of repair. The frame appeared to be affected by rot and had detached at the joins so much so that there was a considerable gap between the frame and the window glass. The tenants claim that they told Mr Biswas about the issue, and it took “months” before any repairs were done. They also said that the repairs were not done to a reasonable standard and were simply a temporary patch up. They said that the person who completed the repairs simply hammered the frame back so as to join with the glass, but this caused the frame to overlap with the adjoining window which caused another gap. They said that Mr Biswas and another person came and put a draught strip over the gap The tenants said that the window still had a gap, and the window would not close properly. They said that they had to nail it shut to get it to stay closed.
The tenants claim that the kitchen window and a bedroom window were also in a poor state of repair with rot and gaps, and the kitchen window did not have a latch. They again said that they had to nail the windows shut to ensure they stayed closed and to try to minimise the draughts. This meant that there was no opening window in the bedroom (it was not clear from the evidence whether there were other windows that could open in the living room or kitchen).
Mr Biswas claims that the tenants only notified him of the problem with the living room window on 6 January 2024 and repairs were completed to a satisfactory standard on 30 January 2024.
I have some doubt that Mr Biswas was not aware of the issues with the living room window, in particular their poor state of repair, until 6 January as claimed. He accepts that he did some repairs to the bedroom window last year and it would, in my view have been obvious at that time or at any other time during inspections and other visits to the property that the living room window was also in need of repair. However, the tenants did not provide any evidence to support when they first believe that Mr Biswas became aware of the issues with the windows. I therefore make no finding on whether the living room window repairs were completed in a timely manner.
However, I do not consider that the repairs that were completed to the living room window were completed to a reasonable or trades man like standard. I also find that Mr Biswas was aware that the kitchen window required repair and he attempted repairs (filling the gaps with bog) that did not fully remedy the issue with draughts or issue with the window not being able to close property. Similarly, I find that Mr Biswas was more likely than not aware that the kitchen window also required repairs and those repairs have not been done.
Taking into account all of the circumstances I consider $1,000 reasonable to compensate the tenants for the failure to repair the windows at all or adequately. Bathroom rail
Mr Biswas accepts that the tenants “told him one day months ago” that there was an issue with the bathroom rail not being attached adequately which would cause it to fall. Mr Biswas claims that he fixed it last year. The tenants dispute that he did so.
I find on the evidence before me that it is more likely than not that the issue with the rail was not remedied. Mr Biswas did not provide any evidence to establish how he claims he fixed it or evidence to support his claim that he did fix it.
In the circumstances, including the length of time the tenants have had to put up with the rail falling (some two years), I consider $200.00 reasonable compensation. Bedroom wall and ceiling
There was no dispute that there were large cracks in the bedroom wall and ceiling. The tenants claim that this damage was there at the tenancy commencement but had become much worse over time. One of the tenant’s said that the affected room is her son’s bedroom, but he has been unable to use it because she was concerned about the stability of the wall.
Mr Biswas did not accept that the damage was there at the tenancy commencement, but he accepts that he knew about the damage. He said that it was not repaired because it would be a very big job. However, the fact that the work required might be “big” does not relieve the landlord from his obligation in section 45(1)(b) of the Act to complete necessary repairs.
I order the landlord to pay the tenants compensation of $3,000.00 for the failure to repair the wall and ceiling damage. In assessing the amount of compensation I have taken into account the effect on the tenants of the damage, particularly that they have not had the use of a bedroom; the length of tenancy; and that the tenants are paying the landlord $910.00 per week for the tenancy.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

As mentioned, the landlord applied to terminate the tenancy for non payment of rent. However, after deducting the compensation payable to the tenants from the rent claimed, the tenants are not in arrears with rent.
The grounds to terminate the tenancy have therefore not been satisfied and the application for termination is dismissed. Tribunal application fee.
The tenants have been wholly successful in their claims. This means that they are entitled to payment of the Tribunal application fee. On the other hand, the landlord has been unsuccessful in its claim and is therefore not entitled to payment of the fee paid by it. Suppression
The landlord applied, in its application, for a suppression order.
Section 95A of the Act provides that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party who has been wholly or substantially successful in the proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published (unless the limited circumstances set out in the section apply).
However, the landlord has been unsuccessful in its claims and in its defence to the tenants’ claims. The application for name suppression is therefore not granted.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4884681 — Rent arrears at 44 Maxwell Street, Riccarton, Christchurch 8041

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4884681 — Rent arrears at 44 Maxwell Street, Riccarton, Christchurch 8041

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Did the landlord comply with their obligations regarding maintenance and repairs?

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Did the landlord comply with their obligations regarding maintenance and repairs?

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions