During the hearing, the trust argued that the tenant contributed to the water damage by not using the shower curtain or bath mat. Tribunal adjudicator A. Macpherson disagreed.
“I find it likely the damage was inevitable due to the inadequacies of the shower curtain and design of the bathroom, rather than the tenant failing to use the curtain or put down a mat.
“The inspection photographs clearly show the mat in the bathroom and shower curtain inside the bath.”
The tribunal also found that the landlord failed to undertake other minor repairs of issues such as loose window latches, water damage to the front door and defective guttering.
The property also lacked approved heating, with the tribunal ruling a potbelly stove at the property could not be used, and the fireplace roof was leaking. The decision also identifies part of the ceiling which required repair.
The tenancy ended in November, when the owner deemed the property uninhabitable and served the trust with an eviction notice, with the trust, in turn, serving one to the tenant.
Other claims made by the tenant, including damage to an exterior deck, a hole in the garden, a loose power point socket and damaged front stairs were not proven due to insufficient evidence. The tenant originally sought $73,000 in compensation.
The decision notes that the trust, as subletters, ran into difficulties with the landlord, but does not say what those difficulties were.
The trust admitted to the tribunal that they “initially struggled to understand their role as sublandlord”.
The tribunal awarded $2145 in compensation to the tenant - equivalent to a rent refund of $15 per week for the length of the tenancy. A further $750 in exemplary damages was ordered.
In a statement, the trust’s acting CEO Sarah Isaac said they accept the tribunal’s findings, have apologised to the tenant and will comply with the compensation order.
“Inexperience saw us sign a contract with another party who was acting on behalf of the owner, so we were in effect a sub-landlord, as the ruling states, and not able to remedy defects directly but were reliant on the other party to do so.”
As a result, the trust has updated its policies to ensure issues such as this are dealt with swiftly, Isaac said.
“This includes ensuring it has contractual arrangements built into its agreements with property owners and their representatives to ensure any repairs are carried out promptly in the case of urgent matters and in a timely manner in the case of other matters.”
Second judgment against trust in just over a month
This week’s judgment is the second against the trust in just over a month.
In December, the tribunal ruled the trust failed to respond to concerns of a young mother of four undergoing chemotherapy, living in a mould-ridden Rotorua property.
The woman moved into the property with her children in November 2020. She remained there until July last year.
Almost immediately she found issues with the home which she subsequently raised with the trust. She continued to voice her concerns about the state of the home throughout her tenancy, but these were not followed up.
“The landlord has been upfront that they have been lacking in their obligations during this tenancy,” the decision stated.
The tenant was awarded $2160 in exemplary damages and a further $480 in compensation.
Just five days earlier, the Rotorua Daily Post reported residents at another property subletted by the trust were provided alternative accommodation after it was discovered the property did not have consent.
The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment launched an investigation.
Cockroach infestations, cold showers, a leaky roof, and sleeping with a hammer for safety were some of the conditions residents of the property claimed to be living in.
