Published tribunal order
Tenancy Tribunal case 5255239 — Rent arrears at 104A Kidd Road, Karaka, RD 1, Papakura 2580
Decided 22 Jun 2026 · Published 22 Jun 2026 · Application 5255239
- Rent arrears
Order
- CSI Property Management Limited and Tim James and Lily James as trustees of the Lisa Li Family Trust must pay St Johns Property Group Limited $14,563.71 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:
- The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $6,000.00 (5650833-003) to St Johns Property Group Limited immediately.
Reasons
- Both parties attended the hearing on 13 April 2026. Mr Raju appeared as counsel for the tenant. Nasir Bhuiyan appeared for the landlord’s agent CSI Property Management Limited. Sajid Ali and Stewart Jackson appeared for the tenant company.
- The tenant’s counterclaims are against both the landlord’s agent CSI Property Management Limited and the landlord and owner. The definition of landlord, as set out in section 2 Residential Tenancies Act 1986, includes the agent of the landlord, as appropriate in this case.
- The tenant accepts the landlord’s calculations for rent arrears owing at the end of the tenancy. I order the rent to be paid, subject to these findings, accordingly.
- Against the rent owing, I order the landlord to reimburse the amounts set out in the table above. The emails and communication between the tenant and the landlord (including the landlord’s agent) at the material time support the landlord’s agreement to reimburse the above costs to the tenant.
- The tenant claim the landlord breached their quiet enjoyment and harassed them when the landlord tried to prohibit the tenant’s AirBnB operations midway during the tenancy. The landlord also tried to increase the rent despite the tenancy agreement being on a fixed term and even upon the tenant exercising one right of renewal, the landlord still could not increase the rent.
- 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.
- The material issue is whether the tenant is expressly permitted under this tenancy agreement to sublet the property and run AirBnB operations which appears to be the primary reason for which the property had been rented by the tenant.
- The tenant’s direct evidence is that the first property manager Kim Urquhart has verbally but expressly allowed them to sublet and use the premises for AirBnB purposes. No direct evidence to the contrary from Ms Urquhart was adduced by the landlord at the hearing. I reject the landlord’s evidence that they was not aware of the tenant’s subletting operations.
- The fact that the premises had been let to a company as opposed to an individual also supports the tenant’s submission that the property may be sublet to third parties because a corporation simply cannot occupy the premises physically and any occupation of the premises by a natural person, whether by the company’s staff or directors/officers, would prima facie be in breach of the tenancy agreement in terms of having “sublet” the premises to a third party.
- Clause 27 of the written tenancy agreement specifically states that the property, without prior consent from the landlord or the property manager, cannot be rented out “on a short term or daily basis or for the third parties’ holiday purposes for financial reward”.
- There were 5 additional/special terms and conditions stated on the tenancy agreement, including a provision that the property cannot be marketed for sale during the tenancy and the option for the tenant to renew the 2-year fixed term for another year on the same terms (including the rent).
- To a certain extent, the confusion that arose during the tenancy on whether the tenant can run their AirBnB business from the property was largely due to the tenant not striking out or insisting on the revision of clause 27 of the tenancy agreement, or adding the right to be able to do so expressly in the additional/special terms, when entering into the tenancy agreement with the landlord.
- Yet the landlord’s property manager and the landlord themselves have allowed the operations to carry despite the obvious signs that AirBnb subletting has been going on at the property at the early stages of the tenancy. Any issue of the landlord’s agents allowing the premises to be sublet for AirBnB in contravention of the landlord’s express instructions is a matter between the landlord and their agent. The acquiescence by the agent to the subletting meant that the landlord themselves are bound by the terms agreed between the tenant and their agent.
- I find on balance that the landlord’s original property manager has expressly permitted the tenant to sublet the premises, including on a short term or daily basis or for the third parties’ holiday purposes for financial reward.
- For those reasons, the landlord has interfered with the tenant’s peace, comfort and enjoyment of the premises when the landlord tried to forbid AirBnB operations subsequently.
- I do not consider however that the landlord has breached the tenant’s quiet enjoyment in circumstances that amount to harassment. A disagreement of the legal effect of the terms of the tenancy does not amount to harassment.
- I award the tenant compensation for breach of quiet enjoyment as set out in the above.
- St Johns Property Group Limited claim that the landlord has breached their obligations under section 45 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
- Under section 45, a landlord must: a) provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair b) comply with all requirements in respect of smoke alarms and insulation set out in the Residential Tenancies (Smoke Alarms and Insulation) Regulations 2016 c) comply with any relevant enactment in relation to buildings, health and safety d) provide an adequate means for the collection and storage of water if there is no reticulated supply
- The landlord is also obliged under section 45(1)(bb) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) to comply 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.
- I accept the report from 23 September 2023 from Cosy Spaces NZ which proves that the premises fail on various Healthy Homes Standard requirements. I prefer the Cosy Spaces report over the landlord’s Panda Healthy Homes Standard report; I consider the Cosy Spaces report and reasons given better reflects the state of the property at the material times.
- Rather than focus on ensuring that the landlord meets the Healthy Homes standards, the landlord’s property managers at CSI Property Management Limited seems more concerned about doing the landlord’s bidding in forbidding the tenant from running an AirBnB enterprise from the premises midway through the term of the fixed term tenancy, and trying to increase the rent, when the landlord was not entitled to do so. The property manager ought to have familiarised himself with the specific terms of the tenancy agreement (even if he was not the original property manager) instead.
- I consider the above awards of compensation and exemplary damages appropriate having regard to the quantum of rent paid by the tenant and the nature and extent of the landlord’s breach.
- Ignorance of the state of the premises in terms of meeting Healthy Homes standards is no excuse. Even if the landlord genuinely thought that having a fireplace would comply with the requirements of having a fixed form of heating (in terms of meeting Healthy Homes standards), the tenancy agreement prepared by the landlord’s original property manager makes it clear that the landlord would install a heatpump but the landlord failed to do so during the entire tenancy. Again, it would have been prudent for the landlord and their current property manager to have properly appraised them themselves with the salient terms of the tenancy agreement. It was an express breach of the tenancy agreement by the landlord not to have installed a heatpump when the tenancy agreement expressly provides that it will be installed.
- The remaining claims of the tenant has not been proved. I specifically reject the tenant’s claim that the landlord has discriminated against them.
- Only the amounts set our in the table above are proved.
- Given that the amounts awarded in favour of the tenant exceeds the rent arrears, I hereby direct the return of the bond to the tenant.
- Lastly, I also order the reimbursement of the filing fee to the tenant as the tenant is largely successful in their claim.