What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5384685?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5384685?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5384685?

The primary dispute was Healthy homes.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5384685?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13138812-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5384685?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5384685?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5384685?

The primary dispute was Healthy homes.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5384685?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13138812-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Room 12A, 30 Westward Ho, Glen Eden, Auckland 0602, Tenancy Tribunal Case 5384685 — Healthy homes

Order

The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing by video conference.
The applicant is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.
The applicant sought compensation for the cost incurred to heat hot water at the premises because he claimed that he was told this cost was included in his rent payments.
This tenancy agreement was for an apartment in a group of apartments that has one water inlet pipe. The consequence of this is that the tenants cannot be charged for water on an individual basis and the landlord pays the for the water used at the apartments.
The tenants said that their previous tenancy had the cost for heating hot water included in the rent and said that they sought to clarify if this apartment was rented on the same basis.
Soon after their application was approved, but prior to signing the agreement, the tenant emailed the landlord asking, on 1 September 2025 I also wanted to clarify something, when you say water is included is it cold and hot water? Some places specifically say one or both, so I wanted to make sure.
The landlord replied 10 minutes later. It is both hot and cold water.
And the tenant replied. Perfect
It is this email chain, and conversation with the property manager at the property viewing, that the tenant relied on believing this meant the rent included the cost for heating the hot water.
The tenant provided copies of electricity accounts showing the increase cost of electricity since they were charged to heat hot water at their new premises. They had seen the hot water cylinder in the wardrobe but dispute that they knew what it was for.
The property manager said that she explains at every viewing that there is only one water inlet into the apartment complex and no individual water metres so tenants are not charged for any water use because it can’t be measured. There is a hot water cylinder in the main bedroom wardrobe that the tenant was aware of, and this heats the water for the apartment using electricity.
The tenancy agreement states under liability that water is the landlord’s liability and power is the tenants.
The agreement states in clause 24 Outgoings, The tenant agrees to pay for all outgoings exclusively attributable to the tenants occupation including electricity gas, gas to heat hot water telephone and Internet charges.
The landlord said her conversations with the tenant were based on water supply being included and when the tenant asked if both hot and cold she thought they meant water in general, that water would be provided for both hot water and cold. She did not understand that the tenant was asking if this was covered by the rent. Law
A tenancy agreement is a contract which includes terms and conditions that bind the parties. Prior to signing the agreement, the parties can negotiate terms that are then recorded, such as the reduction in rent and earlier start date that were agreed upon by the parties in this instance.
The Tribunal can use general contract law principles where it is consistent with the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, and I have considered the provisions of the Contractual and Commercial Law Act 2017.
What has occurred is a misunderstanding by both parties about the cost to heat the water. The property manager believed that she had clarified that there would be no water charges for the premises but in doing so the tenant became confused and thought this meant no charges for hot and cold water.
To complicate matters the property manager had never had anyone ask if the rent covered electricity for water heating and the tenants had had experiences where this was not the status quo which resulted in the parties communicating at crossed purposes.
To resolve this, we look to the signed tenancy agreement which stated very clearly that the tenant was liable for the costs of power, and the landlord the cost for water. It is this document that is taken as a record of what was agreed upon. I do not find that there was a mistake or misrepresentation as the agreement recorded what the landlord had intended.
It is unfortunate that the tenants’ genuine attempts to clarify did not in fact achieve this. When I consider the terms of the agreement and that the landlord has shown the tenants a hot water cylinder in the wardrobe, and communications between the parties I am not persuaded that the landlord told the tenant that the cost to heat the water was included in the tenant’s rent payments.
I do not find that the landlord is liable for any compensation and the application is dismissed.

Order

The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing by video conference.
The applicant is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.
The applicant sought compensation for the cost incurred to heat hot water at the premises because he claimed that he was told this cost was included in his rent payments.
This tenancy agreement was for an apartment in a group of apartments that has one water inlet pipe. The consequence of this is that the tenants cannot be charged for water on an individual basis and the landlord pays the for the water used at the apartments.
The tenants said that their previous tenancy had the cost for heating hot water included in the rent and said that they sought to clarify if this apartment was rented on the same basis.
Soon after their application was approved, but prior to signing the agreement, the tenant emailed the landlord asking, on 1 September 2025 I also wanted to clarify something, when you say water is included is it cold and hot water? Some places specifically say one or both, so I wanted to make sure.
The landlord replied 10 minutes later. It is both hot and cold water.
And the tenant replied. Perfect
It is this email chain, and conversation with the property manager at the property viewing, that the tenant relied on believing this meant the rent included the cost for heating the hot water.
The tenant provided copies of electricity accounts showing the increase cost of electricity since they were charged to heat hot water at their new premises. They had seen the hot water cylinder in the wardrobe but dispute that they knew what it was for.
The property manager said that she explains at every viewing that there is only one water inlet into the apartment complex and no individual water metres so tenants are not charged for any water use because it can’t be measured. There is a hot water cylinder in the main bedroom wardrobe that the tenant was aware of, and this heats the water for the apartment using electricity.
The tenancy agreement states under liability that water is the landlord’s liability and power is the tenants.
The agreement states in clause 24 Outgoings, The tenant agrees to pay for all outgoings exclusively attributable to the tenants occupation including electricity gas, gas to heat hot water telephone and Internet charges.
The landlord said her conversations with the tenant were based on water supply being included and when the tenant asked if both hot and cold she thought they meant water in general, that water would be provided for both hot water and cold. She did not understand that the tenant was asking if this was covered by the rent. Law
A tenancy agreement is a contract which includes terms and conditions that bind the parties. Prior to signing the agreement, the parties can negotiate terms that are then recorded, such as the reduction in rent and earlier start date that were agreed upon by the parties in this instance.
The Tribunal can use general contract law principles where it is consistent with the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, and I have considered the provisions of the Contractual and Commercial Law Act 2017.
What has occurred is a misunderstanding by both parties about the cost to heat the water. The property manager believed that she had clarified that there would be no water charges for the premises but in doing so the tenant became confused and thought this meant no charges for hot and cold water.
To complicate matters the property manager had never had anyone ask if the rent covered electricity for water heating and the tenants had had experiences where this was not the status quo which resulted in the parties communicating at crossed purposes.
To resolve this, we look to the signed tenancy agreement which stated very clearly that the tenant was liable for the costs of power, and the landlord the cost for water. It is this document that is taken as a record of what was agreed upon. I do not find that there was a mistake or misrepresentation as the agreement recorded what the landlord had intended.
It is unfortunate that the tenants’ genuine attempts to clarify did not in fact achieve this. When I consider the terms of the agreement and that the landlord has shown the tenants a hot water cylinder in the wardrobe, and communications between the parties I am not persuaded that the landlord told the tenant that the cost to heat the water was included in the tenant’s rent payments.
I do not find that the landlord is liable for any compensation and the application is dismissed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5384685 — Healthy homes at Room 12A, 30 Westward Ho, Glen Eden, Auckland 0602,

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5384685 — Healthy homes at Room 12A, 30 Westward Ho, Glen Eden, Auckland 0602,

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions