What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4885661?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Jason John Annette at 7 George Crescent, Buckland, Pukekohe

How much money was awarded in case 4885661?

Compensation: Compensation - leaks-…: $550.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: Moving Costs: $750.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $400.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $5,700.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant; Rent Arrears: $3,840.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4885661?

The primary dispute was State of repair. Related themes: Leaks, Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4885661?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10579140-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4885661?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Jason John Annette at 7 George Crescent, Buckland, Pukekohe

How much money was awarded in case 4885661?

Compensation: Compensation - leaks-…: $550.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: Moving Costs: $750.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $400.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $5,700.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant; Rent Arrears: $3,840.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4885661?

The primary dispute was State of repair. Related themes: Leaks, Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4885661?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10579140-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

7 George Crescent, Buckland, Pukekohe 2677 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4885661 — State of repair

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4885661 — net $3,580.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears to 29 July 2024	$3,840.00		Rent arrears to 29 July 2024
Compensation: replacement furnishings		$400.00	replacement furnishings
Exemplary damages: Failure to Maintain		$5,700.00	Failure to Maintain
Compensation: Compensation - leaks- 20 November to		$550.00	Compensation - leaks- 20 November to
Compensation: Moving costs		$750.00	Moving costs
Filing fee reimbursement		$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Total award	$3,840.00	$7,420.44
Net award		$3,580.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant		$3,580.44

The tenancy of Jason John Annette at 7 George Crescent, Buckland, Pukekohe 2677 is terminated, and possession is granted to Prestige Rental Management Limited, at 11.59pm on Monday 29 July 2024.

Prestige Rental Management Limited must pay Jason John Annette $3,580.44 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:

Reasons

Both parties and their representatives, Ms Kildare for the tenant, and Ms Chan and Ms Zhou for the landlord attended the hearing held today.

The tenancy is for an older split-level home comprising of 3 bedrooms and a rumpus room and garaging. The tenancy is for a fixed term tenancy from 14 August 2023 to 11 August 2024. The claims

This is a cross application. The tenant filed his application on the 12 May 2024. He claims: a) That the landlord breached s 45(1)(b) RTA by failing to repair and maintain: (i)A cracked window in the bedroom since the start of the tenancy. (ii)Mould on the bathroom roof- present since the beginning of the tenancy. (iii)A pantry door that was not attached since the beginning of the tenancy. (iv)Leaking in the roof, causing water to come into the property and the ceiling in the lounge/dining room to sag.

The tenant sought to have his tenancy terminated as at 29 July (2 weeks from the hearing date) the tenant asked for compensation of $12,000.00, rent reduction until the end of the tenancy and exemplary damages as well as the filing fee.

The landlord agrees that the tenancy should end.

The landlord filed its claims on the 5 July 2024 the landlord seeks termination, rent arrears and rent till the end of the tenancy. The landlord also claims that the tenant has not notified them of defects at the property. Termination.

As both parties agree that the tenancy should end. I terminate the tenancy as at the 29 July 2024. This will give the tenant some time to move into his new property. The tenant’s claims.

On the 20 November 2023 the tenant came home from work to find a significant amount of water in his lounge/ dining room area, the water was coming in through the HRV system, a crack in the ceiling and in the door frames. The tenant took videos of the leaking which he sent to the landlord and which he played at today’s hearing.

The tenant notified the landlord immediately of the problem at the property.

The tenants says that since November, there has been another 5 occasions when the property leaked, on each occasion, he has to clean up the property and dry it out using the heat pumps. The tenant has had to brace the sagging ceiling to prevent it from collapsing. The tenant says that whilst he has not notified the landlord every time it occurs, he did draw the landlord’s attention to the problem and showed them the bracing the cracks in the ceiling the damaged carpet and any other damage caused by the leaks at Inspections in March 2024.

The tenant says that despite sending the landlord videos of the leaking the landlord has failed to send anyone around to investigate the problem and repair the damage. The tenant says this is because the landlord appears to know what the problem is but does not have the funds to repair it. The tenant referred me to an email that the landlord sent to him on the 13 December 2023 which says: I hope this message finds you well. Following our recent discussion about the property's roof, I wanted to provide an update regarding the ongoing issue. Due to the recurring leaks during extreme weather, the landlord is committed to addressing the matter to ensure your comfort and the property's integrity. The landlord has taken proactive steps by consulting professionals to investigate the root cause of the problem. It has been identified that the internal gutter drainage system, positioned at the centre of the roof, is contributing to this issue. To effectively resolve this, it has been recommended that the entire roof undergoes restructuring. Regrettably, the comprehensive restructuring required for the entire roof exceeds the landlord's current financial capacity. Despite their commitment to resolving the issue, a complete overhaul may not be immediately feasible. In acknowledgment of the inconvenience caused by this condition, the landlord is still willing to adjust the rent from $630 to $520 as a partial compensation for the property's state. The landlord continues to explore alternative solutions and remains dedicated to finding a viable resolution. Your patience and understanding during this process are greatly appreciated. Should you have any further concerns or suggestions regarding this matter, please don't hesitate to contact me.

It is clear from that email that the landlord was aware of the leaking problem, (the landlord accepted that the previous tenant had had issues with leaking in the cyclone and or the anniversary day floods) what has caused it (the internal guttering system) and that the landlord does not have the funds at that time to fix the issue.

The landlord and the tenant agreed on a reduction of rent, the tenant told me that he understood that the landlord would repair the roof/ gutters when he had the funds because that landlord says that he remains committed to resolving the issue. The tenant said that since the agreement the landlord has done nothing further, at no stage during his tenancy has a tradesperson (apart from a person who cleaned the gutters in June after the tenant filed his claim) come to the property to investigate any of the problems or to fix items.

The landlord said that they understood that the tenant had agreed to the compensation by way of rent reduction and that was the end of the matters.

The landlord also says that the tenant did not report the leaking on each occasion since November. The landlord accepts that the tenant pointed out damage from the leaks and the leaks were discussed at the March 2023 inspection, but the agent says that she thought that the tenant was referring to damage caused by the November leaking.

Section 45(1)(b) provides: The landlord shall provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair having regard to the age and character of the premises and the period during which the premises are likely to remain habitable and available for residential purposes.

I am satisfied that the landlord was aware that the property was leaking before the tenancy even began, and that the landlord did not provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair because they did not investigate the cause of the leaks and did not attend to repairs to stop the leaking. This is a breach of s45(1)(b) RTA. a) The landlord accepted that the previous tenant had reported leaking. Although the landlord said it was one off and only as a result of a one in 60- year event. b) The neighbours told the tenant that the house had previously leaked. c) The landlord said in its email of the 13 December that the cause of the problem was identified as the “internal gutter drainage system, positioned at the centre of the roof, is contributing to this issue.” As the landlord had not sent any tradesperson to look at the problem after the tenant complained of the leaking in November, nor at any time before that, then the only conclusion that can be drawn is that the landlord was aware of the leaking and the cause of the leaking before this tenancy began and had done nothing to rectify that cause. d) I am satisfied that the leaking continued during the tenancy causing damage to the ceiling, carpets and tenant’s belongings. e) I am satisfied that the tenant told the landlord about continued leaking at the March 2024 inspection.

I also am satisfied that the landlord failed to repair the pantry door and the broken window in the tenant’s window, both of which can be clearly seen as damaged in the ingoing inspection report. I am satisfied that the landlord knew about these defects because the landlord asked the tenant for a price to fix them. When the tenant gave a price in September 2023, the landlord said it was too expensive. The landlord has taken no further steps to fix these items.

I am also satisfied that the landlord failed to provide and maintain the ceiling of the bathroom in a reasonable condition. The ingoing inspection report shows a ceiling that looks mouldy, the landlord says that it is not mould, but does not know what it is. In any case it is not in a reasonable condition and needs replacement. Given its proximity to the known leaks I consider it prudent that the landlord would investigate the cause of why the ceiling has blackened. The defect is obvious in all of the inspection reports and again the landlord asked the tenant for a quote for the tenant to repair the gib in September but said that it was too expensive.

I have found that the landlord breached s45(1)(b). I turn now to the issue of compensation and exemplary damages. The Tribunals ability to award exemplary damages and compensation.

In the District Court decision of Gardiner & Others v Upland Bay Investments Limited CIV 2014-085-13 NZHC 30 May 2014 Judge Tompkins concluded that when multiple claims are made under the one breach then the maximum amount that can be awarded is the maximum for that particular act. This means that when there are multiple claims under section 45(1A) then the maximum exemplary damages award for all the breaches is $7200.00 not $7200 for each breach. 1

Judge Thompkins also noted that this does not prevent the claimant claiming compensation and exemplary damages. This means that the Tribunal can award compensation as well as an exemplary damages.

Compensation should restore the party to the position that they would have been had the breach not occurred. Exemplary damages are more punitive in nature and are like a fine, the aim is to punish and deter breaches of the RTA.

Exemplary damages under the Residential Tenancies Act are only for certain acts that Parliament has deemed to be unlawful acts. A breach of s45 (1)(b) is an unlawful act pursuant to s 45(1A) RTA. The maximum amount of damages for this breach is $7200 set out in Schedule 1A to the RTA.

The landlord and the tenant agreed to reduce the rent to $520.00 from the 18 December. This was a $110 per week reduction as compensation for the lack of amenity (or ability to use the property fully) due to the damage caused by the leaking.

I do not accept that the tenant ever agreed that this absolved the landlord of their obligation to repair the premises, because the landlord says in the email of 13 December that the landlord remains committed to resolving the issue, which 1 Gardiner, Griffiths, Groves, Venter and O’Connor v Upland Bay Investments Limited CIV -2014-085- 13 NZHC, 30 May 2014 at paragraph [29]. I take to mean repairing the roof, when funds allow. In any case, the landlord cannot contract out of their obligations in the RTA.

I consider the rent abatement to be sufficient to compensate the tenant for the lack of amenity of full enjoyment of the premises on a week to week basis, but I do not consider that the compensation is full settlement of the claims. I also note that the rent abatement should have been backdated to the date of the leak on the 20 November, that is an extra five weeks and I have awarded this compensation to the tenant.

The tenant’s sofa was saturated in the first leak. As the landlord was aware of the problem with the leak, before it occurred. I consider that they are responsible for this damage. The tenant told me that he had to purchase a second-hand replacement sofa for $500.00 and I award the tenant that amount. This amount also takes into account the tenant’s time and expense in dumping his old sofa.

I am satisfied that the landlord has committed an unlawful act pursuant to s45 (1A) RTA.

Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. See section 109(3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

I have awarded $5700 for this breach this amount takes into account the following: a) That the landlord was aware of the defects at the property before the tenancy began and did not take steps to rectify those breaches before the tenancy began. b) That the landlord took no steps during the tenancy to remedy the cause of the leaks, the damage caused by the leaks, to fix the window, bathroom ceiling or the pantry door. This was despite the landlord doing regular inspections of the property and having regular contact with the tenant over his rent arrears. c) The tenant’s photographs and video of the 20 November show significant problems at the property, the fact that the tenant had to brace the ceiling, should have been treated as a serious problem and urgent steps should have been taken to investigate the cause of the problem and remedy the damage caused. d) The landlord sought to ‘blame’ the tenant for not notifying the landlord, when in fact the landlord was aware of the problem and did nothing to remedy it. e) The effect on the tenant, the tenant says that every time it leaked, he had to clean the carpet using his own carpet cleaning equipment, he had to run the heat pumps to dry out the carpet. He said he became angry and frustrated at the landlord’s lack of repair and felt that there was no point in raising issues with the landlord. He said he has been extremely stressed as he does not know what he will come home to at night, especially if it has been raining, he said he has suffered from anxiety and a deterioration in his mental health. He said he felt taken advantage of and unheard and powerless. The tenant also said he was worried about the safety of the property, for instance that it has had so many leaks, will the ceiling collapse or the floors rot through? He said that he spends a lot of time worrying about the electrics at the property because he knows that there is likely rainwater in the ceiling. f) The tenant also said that he could not take on flatmate to help with costs, because who would want to live in a place that leaks. The tenant also said that his house smelt damp and he was worried about the effect of the mould in the bathroom ceiling. He could not use the pantry, and there was a draught in the cracked window. g) It is in the public interest that when there are serious defects with a property, that are ongoing without any effort being made by a landlord to remedy them, that a large award is made both as a deterrent, and to ensure that landlord’s simply do not fix items because it is more cost effective to pay an exemplary damages award.

Even if the parties had not agreed to terminate this tenancy today, I would have done so because of the concerns I have about the structural integrity of the ceiling. I do not consider that it is likely to be safe to be rented out in its current state. The tenant needs time to move – he has secured another property in another town, I am going to allow him two weeks as requested to move his items. I have reduced the rent owed for the last two weeks to just $100 per week, this is because I consider that the property is not safe to be lived in. The tenant should seek to stay somewhere else during this period if he can.

I have also awarded the tenant moving costs of $750.00. The tenant should have been able to have the full use of the tenancy till the end of the fixed term period without incurring moving costs. I consider the requirement to move to a direct consequence of the landlord’s failure to maintain.

The tenant is in rent arrears. He says that he stopped paying rent because it was the only way to get the landlord’s attention. I award the landlord rent arrears at the reduced rental to today’s date and $100.00 for the next two weeks.

The landlord has also claimed that the tenant breached the obligation to notify the landlord of the damage. I reject that claim. The tenant told the landlord of the leaks as soon as they occurred on the 20 November 2023, it was then the landlord’s obligation to fix the leaks. The tenant was not obliged to contact the landlord every time it leaked. The tenant did tell the landlord of the ongoing problem at the March inspection. The landlord’s claim that the tenant did not notify the landlord of the problems is dismissed. The filing fee

Because Jason John Annette has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4885661 — net $3,580.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears to 29 July 2024	$3,840.00		Rent arrears to 29 July 2024
Compensation: replacement furnishings		$400.00	replacement furnishings
Exemplary damages: Failure to Maintain		$5,700.00	Failure to Maintain
Compensation: Compensation - leaks- 20 November to		$550.00	Compensation - leaks- 20 November to
Compensation: Moving costs		$750.00	Moving costs
Filing fee reimbursement		$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Total award	$3,840.00	$7,420.44
Net award		$3,580.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant		$3,580.44

The tenancy of Jason John Annette at 7 George Crescent, Buckland, Pukekohe 2677 is terminated, and possession is granted to Prestige Rental Management Limited, at 11.59pm on Monday 29 July 2024.

Prestige Rental Management Limited must pay Jason John Annette $3,580.44 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:

Reasons

Both parties and their representatives, Ms Kildare for the tenant, and Ms Chan and Ms Zhou for the landlord attended the hearing held today.

The tenancy is for an older split-level home comprising of 3 bedrooms and a rumpus room and garaging. The tenancy is for a fixed term tenancy from 14 August 2023 to 11 August 2024. The claims

The landlord agrees that the tenancy should end.

As both parties agree that the tenancy should end. I terminate the tenancy as at the 29 July 2024. This will give the tenant some time to move into his new property. The tenant’s claims.

The tenant notified the landlord immediately of the problem at the property.

The landlord said that they understood that the tenant had agreed to the compensation by way of rent reduction and that was the end of the matters.

I have found that the landlord breached s45(1)(b). I turn now to the issue of compensation and exemplary damages. The Tribunals ability to award exemplary damages and compensation.

Judge Thompkins also noted that this does not prevent the claimant claiming compensation and exemplary damages. This means that the Tribunal can award compensation as well as an exemplary damages.

I am satisfied that the landlord has committed an unlawful act pursuant to s45 (1A) RTA.

Because Jason John Annette has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4885661 — State of repair at 7 George Crescent, Buckland, Pukekohe 2677

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4885661 — State of repair at 7 George Crescent, Buckland, Pukekohe 2677

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions