What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5116508?

The tribunal order states: The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $780.00 (5498376-003) to Lorraine Mary

How much money was awarded in case 5116508?

Property Damage: $800.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5116508?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5116508?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11810714-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5116508?

The tribunal order states: The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $780.00 (5498376-003) to Lorraine Mary

How much money was awarded in case 5116508?

Property Damage: $800.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5116508?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5116508?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11810714-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 2, 790 Fergusson Drive, Elderslea, Upper Hutt Tenancy Tribunal Case 5116508 — Exemplary damages

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5116508 — net $827.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages: Landlord out of NZ no agent	$800.00	Landlord out of NZ no agent
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$827.00
Bond	$780.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$827.00

The tenant attended the hearing by video and was assisted by her daughter who was her appointed and approved representative. The tenant did not attend the hearing.

On the morning of the hearing the landlord sought an adjournment due to work commitments. The landlord did not provide any evidence in support of his request for an adjournment. The adjournment was declined, and the parties were advised that the hearing would proceed.

As the landlord did not join the video hearing an attempt was made to join the landlord to the hearing by telephone, but the call went unanswered. The hearing proceeded in the landlord’s absence.

The tenant has applied for refund of the bond. The landlord may have a claim against the bond, but has not filed a counterclaim with Tenancy Services.

Section 22B(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that, where a tenant applies for refund of the bond, and the landlord seeks payment from the bond, the landlord must file an application setting out the details of the counterclaim. Because the landlord has not filed a counterclaim the bond is refunded in full to the tenant.

Lorraine Mary Roe claims the landlord has been overseas for longer than the Act permits without appointing an agent.

A landlord who is out of New Zealand for longer than 21 consecutive days must ensure they have an agent in New Zealand. See section 16A(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act, for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $1,500.00. See section 16A(6) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

The tenant has explained why they believed the landlord has been out of New Zealand for more than 21 days. In 2023 the tenant contacted the landlord with a maintenance issue with the hot water cylinder. It was then that she discovered he was living in Australia and could not attend at the premises himself. On that occasion he arranged contractors to attend to attempt to repair and then install a new hot water cylinder. The landlord did not appoint an agent. As the landlord has not appointed an agent, they have committed an unlawful act.

Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied that 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.

The tenant continued to contact the landlord while he was living in Australia. She needed to make allowance for the time difference when sending text messages to the landlord.

When the tenant was arranging to move out of the tenancy, she had a problem with the washing machine as it could not be removed. The landlord had sealed the washing machine hose to the outlet to stop a leak and had installed a new sink which prevented the washing machine from being removed.

The tenant attempted to contact the landlord by text and email concerning the difficulty with removing the washing machine on 21 November 2024. The landlord did not respond to the tenant. A move out inspection was carried out on 25 November 2024 by a family member of the landlord. It was only then that the issue with the washing machine was addressed. The landlord agent agreed for the landlord to arrange for it to be removed and delivered to the tenant on the following Saturday.

There were other agreements reached at the exit inspection between the tenant’s agent and the landlord’s agent. Later the landlord did not agree to the agreement.

It is important for a landlord to appoint an agent to act if the landlord is outside New Zealand for longer than 21 consecutive days. This is particularly important due to maintenance issues which can arise without notice and require urgent attention.

In this situation the landlord’s failure to appoint an agent has had an impact on the tenant. I consider that an award of exemplary damages of $800.00 is reasonable in the circumstances.

Because Lorraine Mary Roe has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5116508 — net $827.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages: Landlord out of NZ no agent	$800.00	Landlord out of NZ no agent
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$827.00
Bond	$780.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$827.00

Order

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $780.00 (5498376-003) to Lorraine Mary Roe immediately.
Eric Raj must pay Lorraine Mary Roe $827.00 immediately.

Reasons

The tenant attended the hearing by video and was assisted by her daughter who was her appointed and approved representative. The tenant did not attend the hearing.
On the morning of the hearing the landlord sought an adjournment due to work commitments. The landlord did not provide any evidence in support of his request for an adjournment. The adjournment was declined, and the parties were advised that the hearing would proceed.
As the landlord did not join the video hearing an attempt was made to join the landlord to the hearing by telephone, but the call went unanswered. The hearing proceeded in the landlord’s absence.
The tenant has applied for refund of the bond. The landlord may have a claim against the bond, but has not filed a counterclaim with Tenancy Services.
Section 22B(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that, where a tenant applies for refund of the bond, and the landlord seeks payment from the bond, the landlord must file an application setting out the details of the counterclaim. Because the landlord has not filed a counterclaim the bond is refunded in full to the tenant.
Lorraine Mary Roe claims the landlord has been overseas for longer than the Act permits without appointing an agent.
A landlord who is out of New Zealand for longer than 21 consecutive days must ensure they have an agent in New Zealand. See section 16A(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act, for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $1,500.00. See section 16A(6) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The tenant has explained why they believed the landlord has been out of New Zealand for more than 21 days. In 2023 the tenant contacted the landlord with a maintenance issue with the hot water cylinder. It was then that she discovered he was living in Australia and could not attend at the premises himself. On that occasion he arranged contractors to attend to attempt to repair and then install a new hot water cylinder. The landlord did not appoint an agent. As the landlord has not appointed an agent, they have committed an unlawful act.
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied that 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.
The tenant continued to contact the landlord while he was living in Australia. She needed to make allowance for the time difference when sending text messages to the landlord.
When the tenant was arranging to move out of the tenancy, she had a problem with the washing machine as it could not be removed. The landlord had sealed the washing machine hose to the outlet to stop a leak and had installed a new sink which prevented the washing machine from being removed.
The tenant attempted to contact the landlord by text and email concerning the difficulty with removing the washing machine on 21 November 2024. The landlord did not respond to the tenant. A move out inspection was carried out on 25 November 2024 by a family member of the landlord. It was only then that the issue with the washing machine was addressed. The landlord agent agreed for the landlord to arrange for it to be removed and delivered to the tenant on the following Saturday.
There were other agreements reached at the exit inspection between the tenant’s agent and the landlord’s agent. Later the landlord did not agree to the agreement.
It is important for a landlord to appoint an agent to act if the landlord is outside New Zealand for longer than 21 consecutive days. This is particularly important due to maintenance issues which can arise without notice and require urgent attention.
In this situation the landlord’s failure to appoint an agent has had an impact on the tenant. I consider that an award of exemplary damages of $800.00 is reasonable in the circumstances.
Because Lorraine Mary Roe has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5116508 — Exemplary damages at Unit/Flat 2, 790 Fergusson Drive, Elderslea, Upper Hutt

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5116508 — Exemplary damages at Unit/Flat 2, 790 Fergusson Drive, Elderslea, Upper Hutt

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions