What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5067608?

The tribunal order states: Leslie James Young and Mary Sharon Young to pay The Property Specialists

How much money was awarded in case 5067608?

Rubbish Removal: $225.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5067608?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5067608?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11338112-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5067608?

The tribunal order states: Leslie James Young and Mary Sharon Young to pay The Property Specialists

How much money was awarded in case 5067608?

Rubbish Removal: $225.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5067608?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5067608?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11338112-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

31 Mataora Road, Kenmure, Dunedin 9011 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5067608 — Tenancy dispute

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5067608 — net $225.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rubbish removal	$225.00	Rubbish removal
Net award	$225.00
Bond	$340.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$225.00

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5067608 — net $225.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rubbish removal	$225.00	Rubbish removal
Net award	$225.00
Bond	$340.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$225.00

Order

Leslie James Young and Mary Sharon Young to pay The Property Specialists Limited as agent for Trevor James Croot, Janyce Annette Croot and Lauranne Michelle Croot (Trustees of the T & J Croot Family Trust) $225.00 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $340.00 (H11383610) immediately apportioned as follows: The Property Specialists Limited as agent for Trevor James Croot, Janyce Annette Croot and Lauranne Michelle Croot (Trustees of the T & J Croot Family Trust): $225.00 Leslie James Young and Mary Sharon Young: $115.00
The application by the tenant for compensation of $10,047.00 and exemplary damages is dismissed.
The application by the landlord for further compensation of $1,408.00 is dismissed.

Reasons

The landlord and landlords’ agent, and the tenants’ representative all attended the hearing.
The tenants claimed compensation of $10,047.00 for the failure by the landlord to maintain the premises, provide adequate smoke alarms, and give sufficient notice of rent increases.
In addition, the tenant sought exemplary damages for breach of quiet enjoyment, failure to comply with healthy homes standards or provide insurance details.
In response, the landlord applied for compensation for gardening and rubbish removal, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The tenancy began on 21 November 2001 at a weekly rental of $245.00 and was originally for a fixed term.
When the tenancy ended 23 years later on 1 October 2024 the rent was $385.00 per week.
From 21 November 2020 the tenancy rolled over to a periodic tenancy and no further tenancy agreements were signed by the parties. Tenants’ Claim Did the landlord breach the tenants’ quiet enjoyment?
The tenants’ representative submitted that the landlord frequently went to the premises or called to say he was coming, and the tenants were afraid to refuse in case he wouldn’t renew the tenancy, or he increased the rent.
The representative estimated that these visits happened about twice a year.
While agreeing that he did not give written notice of any visits, the landlord suggested that he usually telephoned the tenants a day or two before any visit.
A landlord must not interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the tenant in their use of the premises. See section 38(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation in circumstances that amount to harassment is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $3,000.00. See section 38(3) and Schedule 1A RTA.
Harassment means "to trouble, worry or distress" or "to wear out, tire, or exhaust" and "indicates a particular pattern of behaviour directed towards another person". MacDonald v Dodds, CIV-2009-019-001524, DC Hamilton, 26 February 2010.
Section 48(2) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that the landlord may enter the premises for the purpose of carrying out necessary repairs or necessary maintenance or for inspecting the premises, after giving the tenant the required notice (at least 24 hours’ notice for repairs or 48 hours for inspections) or with the tenant’s consent given immediately before the time of entry. If the appropriate notice is given, the tenant’s consent to the access is not required.
I find the landlord has not committed an unlawful act.
I am persuaded by the evidence of the landlord that he gave the appropriate notice, albeit that it was verbal.
There is no evidence that the tenants refused to allow the landlord access.
Nor is there any compelling evidence that the landlord breached the tenants’ quiet enjoyment in their use of the premises and certainly not in circumstances that amounted to harassment.
Rather the opposite appears to be the case in that the landlord operated the tenancy in a “hands off” manner, which ultimately appears to have contributed to this dispute.

Did the landlord give the correct notice to increase the rent?

The tenants’ representative suggested that no written notices of rent increases were given to the tenants. Rather the tenants thought the notices put in the letter box were unsigned copies of tenancy agreements.
On the other hand, the landlord provided copies of five written notices of rent increases dated, 17/9/2018, 3/11/2020, 20/10/2021, 24/10/2022, and 20/11/2023 which he believed were handed directly to the tenants.
In addition, the landlord said there were some rent increases between 2001 and 2018, but there was a seven year period when the rent wasn’t increased.
Section 24 sets out the criteria for increasing the rent. The notices must be in writing, specify the amount of increase and the day on which the increase becomes payable.
Rent must not be increased within 12 months after the commencement of the tenancy and within 12 months after the last increase took effect.
Unless there is a provision in the tenancy agreement rent cannot be increased during the term of a fixed term tenancy.
I am satisfied that the evidence supports the landlord complied with the provisions of section 24 with respect to the various rent increases.

Has the landlord has breached their obligations?

The tenants’ representative suggested that the landlord failed to cut the hedges or have the chimney swept after the tenancy began.
As the tenants had undertaken these tasks the representative sought compensation of $10,047.00 for the work
In addition, the representative submitted that the landlord failed to fix what the tenants believed were dangerous front steps and undertook electrical work himself on a lounge light and bathroom heater.
Further the representative suggested that the landlord failed to provide extractor fans in the bathroom and kitchen in breach of the Healthy Homes ventilation standard and there was only one smoke alarm which activated when the tenants used the shower.
On the other hand, the landlord suggested that the tenants had agreed to cut the hedges and he was not asked by them to do this work through out the whole of the tenancy.
The landlord highlighted that at the end of the tenancy the hedges had been cut.
After cleaning the chimney twice at the beginning of the tenancy the landlord said the tenants took over the task.
The landlord was unhappy that it had taken the tenants five months to advise him in 2005 about the chimney fire.
While he agreed in 2022 to pay for repairs to the flue damaged by the tenants, the landlord confirmed he told them he would not pay for sweeping of the chimney.
The landlord submitted he did not believe the front steps needed repairing and he was reluctant to replace the carpet covering the steps because of the coal and wood stored by the tenants on the porch and steps.
Further the landlord disputed he had undertaken any electrical work. Rather he had removed a bayonet fitting from the lounge light and replaced the bulb. He had an electrician repair the bathroom heater.
The landlord suggested that an extractor fan was installed in the bathroom in 2022 and replaced under warranty in June 2024.
However, the landlord agreed there was no extractor fan in the kitchen because of the way the oven was set back in a bay window, and he thought, after discussion with an electrician, the ventilation was adequate. He considered the Healthy Homes Compliance date for the premises was 1 July 2025.
The landlord submitted that there was a smoke alarm installed in the hallway within three metres of the three bedrooms.
On several occasions the landlord said he discovered that the battery had been removed from the alarm and he replaced the alarm with a different one, which also had the battery removed from it.
The landlord confirmed that underfloor and ceiling insulation and a ground moisture barrier had been installed during the tenancy.
Under section 45, a landlord must, among other matters, provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair.
In addition, section 45(1)(bb) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), requires compliance with the Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) 2019 (HHS)
Breaching any of these obligations is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $7,200.00. See section 45(1A) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Compliance dates for the HHS vary depending on the tenancy: a. For private rentals i. If the tenancy commenced between 1 July 2021 and before 28 August 2022, the rental must comply within 90 days of the commencement of any new or renewed tenancy; or ii. If the tenancy commenced between 28 August 2022 but before 3 March 2025, the rental must comply within 120 days of the commencement of any new or renewed tenancy. iii. All private rentals must comply by 1 July 2025.
The ventilation standard sets out minimum expectations around windows and doors, and in particular the area of doors and windows that are openable. The standard also requires that each kitchen and bathroom have extractor fans installed with a minimum defined extraction capacity.
The HHS does provide exemptions in specific circumstances.
As the tenancy began on 21/11/2001 and effectively continued as a periodic tenancy from 21/11/2020 without formal renewal the effective date for Healthy Homes Compliance is 1 July 2025.
This means a compliant extractor fan in the kitchen is not required until 1 July 2025.
The applicant, in this case the tenants are required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, that is, on the balance of probabilities.
In support of the claims about lack of maintenance by the landlord and breach of healthy homes standards the tenants’ representative provided a written statement from the tenants’ daughter, verbal submissions from the tenants, emails with the landlords’ agent, her own submissions about the claims and a photograph of the steps.
While it is possible that the landlord did ignore requests from the tenants and that they felt intimidated, there is no object, compelling evidence to support that it is more likely than not this was the case.
The statements from both parties about the hedges, chimney, lounge light, bathroom heater and smoke alarm mostly directly contradict each other.
While the photograph of the steps shows worn carpet, there is no persuasive evidence to support these were dangerous and how long this may have been the case.
Unfortunately, the tenants chose not to appear at the hearing, and I was unable to hear directly from them. The representative decided against an adjournment to allow them to do so.
I find the landlord has not committed unlawful acts.

Did the landlord fail to provide a copy of the insurance policy for the premises?

The tenants’ representative submitted that the landlord did not provide any insurance information during the tenancy.
The landlord said he was unaware that he needed to provide insurance details to the tenants.
A tenant can request the landlord to provide a copy of any insurance policy which relates to the tenant’s liability for destruction of, or damage to, the premises. The landlord must provide a copy of the policy within a reasonable time. The landlord must notify the tenant of any changes to the information provided, or if the premises are no longer insured. See s 45(2B) and (2C) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching any of these obligations is an unlawful act for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $900.00. See section 45(2D) and Schedule 1A RTA.
I find the landlord has not committed an unlawful act.
My reason for this is that there is simply no evidence to support that the tenants asked the landlord for details of the insurance on the premises any time after August 2019 when this provision came into effect. Landlords’ claim

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

At the end of the tenancy the tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, remove all rubbish, return all keys and security devices, and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord claimed $1,633.00 for rubbish removal from the cellar and garage, cleaning around the house, weeding and rubbish disposal.
In support of the claim the landlord provided photographs taken at the beginning of October and an estimate from the contractor that 60% of the work was rubbish removal and 40% gardening.
While agreeing that some rubbish was left, the tenants’ representative disputed the amount claimed.
The representative confirmed that the tenants were agreeable to paying $225.00 for the rubbish removal but nothing for the garden work, especially as they had left the garden tidy, mowed the lawns and cut the hedges.
I am satisfied by the evidence of both parties that the tenants did not remove all rubbish when they vacated, and some compensation is required.
However, I am not persuaded that the garden was not left reasonably clean and tidy. The one photograph of part of the garden is not sufficient evidence to support the claim.
The amount claimed for rubbish removal has been reduced to reflect the evidence that only one trailer load of rubbish needed removing.
An award has been made for the amount agreed to by the tenants.

Should exemplary damages be awarded?

As the landlord has not committed any unlawful acts exemplary damages are not available to the tenants.
No filing fee is awarded because the applications effectively cancel each other out and the landlord has only been partly successful.
Although the tenants sought name suppression, I am unable to suppress their names because they were unsuccessful.
The landlord did not ask for suppression.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5067608 — Tenancy dispute at 31 Mataora Road, Kenmure, Dunedin 9011

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5067608 — Tenancy dispute at 31 Mataora Road, Kenmure, Dunedin 9011

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Did the landlord give the correct notice to increase the rent?

Has the landlord has breached their obligations?

Did the landlord fail to provide a copy of the insurance policy for the premises?

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Should exemplary damages be awarded?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Did the landlord give the correct notice to increase the rent?

Has the landlord has breached their obligations?

Did the landlord fail to provide a copy of the insurance policy for the premises?

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Should exemplary damages be awarded?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions