Exemplary Damages against LL re: Quiet Enjoyment and LL Right of Entry

[youthworker01]

Hi there

Just wondering if anyone had any case examples of the above?

We are about to file against our ex LL for the above, as they excessively visited the property we rented, gave little or no notice to do so, and even entered the home on one occasion without permission from us.

I have confirmed with the TT we have a case and they advised we claim on the above, my second question is, the maximum amount awarded, is that per charge or per incident?

One month after moving in, after we were told they lived up north and would be over once every few months to maintain the property (except lawns and general weeding as we do that), they moved in to the empty lot next door in their camper van and have been at the house constantly since then.

I got the feeling they wanted to do a heap of gardening and landscaping on the property but not pay the mortgage while they did it.

I have evidence and documentation supporting 10+ of the times they came over in the last month alone, and several from months prior to that. In total though over the last 6 months they have easily been on the property 50+ times.

[flyernzl]

A landlord is entitled to enter the property (but not the house itself) at any reasonable time (ie not 2am) without giving any prior notice.

[sidinz]

Yes, but more than twice a week, on average? Hardly quiet enjoyment. And if it's gardening/landscaping, it's likely each incidence was a few hours long.

[youthworker01]

Incorrect.
Residential Tenancies Act 1986:
48(1) Landlord shall not enter premises without the permission of the tenant
Schedule 2.1(b) Premises: any land or appurtenances
Granted they are allowed for maintenance or inspections but with appropriate notice given and within suitable time frames e.g 3 monthly inspections only,
I've already been told by the Tribunal that they have breached their right of entry and our right to quiet enjoyment and advised to file on this basis.
If what you say is correct, then a landlord at any time can come on the grounds when they feel like it. When renting, we are renting the entire property not just the house.
They have most definitely breached our quiet enjoyment, every second day is excessive. Coming over when they feel like it is excessive.
When we went on a three day weekend we had my brother house sit for us. Landlords just went over and demanded to know who he was and said they have a right to know exactly who is in their house. This is one example of the harassment they have given us.
In no way, shape or form have we been anything other than exceptional tenants so it's not like we are 'undesirables' they were worried about or they wouldn't have extended our one year contract.

[revdev]

Obviously you must have talked with them about this issue - what was their response?

Small correction; it's Tenancy Services you have been talking with, not the Tenancy Tribunal - that bit comes later.

[sidinz]

Residential Tenancies Act 1986:
48(1) Landlord shall not enter premises without the permission of the tenant
Schedule 2.1(b) Premises: any land or appurtenances

Interesting. It was the tenancy hotline people who told me (and others) that landlords can go onto the section without prior notice to carry out outside work provided it doesn't interfere with the quiet enjoyment. The example they gave me was that if I went over to mow the lawns and the tenants were having a barbeque, to turn around and go home again.

[Keys]

The landlord may enter the property at any time to do maintenance etc to the grounds or separated garage. No notification is required.

The number of times they enter could be considered a breach of the tenants quiet enjoyment if it is too excessive.

[Keys]

Incorrect.
Residential Tenancies Act 1986:
48(1) Landlord shall not enter premises without the permission of the tenant
Schedule 2.1(b) Premises: any land or appurtenances

Two posts in their PT career. Doesn't like the answers given and rushes off to missquote the law. Nice.

[BigWal]

Section 48(7) - In this section premises does not include land or facilities.

[Perry]

So it then comes down to what is excessive, it seems. Doing landscaping work may stretch that number a bit more than other things, perhaps?

[MikeC]

I also seem to recall this was 18 months ago. If I was the adjudicator I'd laugh this out of court as a money raising exercise by the ex-tenants.

[Keltro]

Incorrect.
Residential Tenancies Act 1986:
48(1) Landlord shall not enter premises without the permission of the tenant
Schedule 2.1(b) Premises: any land or appurtenances

Hi there.

Believe it or not there are landlords who don't even know the existence of the Res. Tenancy Act.
In my case I took my landlord to the Tribunal for issuing a retaliatory notice along with an illegal period for notice.
Days before the Tribunal hearing the police burst into my bedroom at 2.0am in the morning demanding that I leave. After explaining my residency situation the police left but returned 8.30 next morning claiming according to the landlord I was trespassing. N.B. I was fully paid up in advance and no reason was given for the eviction. Rather than give up my keys I drove with the police to my lawyer. After a couple of hours including a conference call with Tenancy Services the police apologized profusely and accepted they had acted illegally. In the meantime the landlord entered and changed the locks, seized my goods and made arrangements to dispose of them.
When I arrived back late that evening the landlord blocked my entry whereby the police were again involved. A dramatic scene followed but this time the police were not having any nonsense and informed the landlord I could break into the property if a new key was not presented.
So I proceeded a few days later to the Tribunal Court Hearing which ended up being several hearings whereby I have now lost any confidence or faith in the tenancy Tribunal process. The claim for exemplary damages regarding unlawful entry was regarded by the adjudicator as being at the "bottom end" of culpability and after clearly demonstrating the malicious and retaliatory nature of the landlords actions the grand sum of $100 was awarded as damages. It will probably cost me more than that to recover the $100 from the landlord.

[Learning]

Hey Keltro, could you post the TT order number so we can see the details?

[Keltro]

Hey Keltro, could you post the TT order number so we can see the details?

I will soon as I get the written ruling. The hearing was only last Friday so won't be up yet.

[sidinz]

Hi there.

Believe it or not there are landlords who don't even know the existence of the Res. Tenancy Act.
In my case I took my landlord to the Tribunal for issuing a retaliatory notice along with an illegal period for notice.
Days before the Tribunal hearing the police burst into my bedroom at 2.0am in the morning demanding that I leave. After explaining my residency situation the police left but returned 8.30 next morning claiming according to the landlord I was trespassing. N.B. I was fully paid up in advance and no reason was given for the eviction. Rather than give up my keys I drove with the police to my lawyer. After a couple of hours including a conference call with Tenancy Services the police apologized profusely and accepted they had acted illegally. In the meantime the landlord entered and changed the locks, seized my goods and made arrangements to dispose of them.
When I arrived back late that evening the landlord blocked my entry whereby the police were again involved. A dramatic scene followed but this time the police were not having any nonsense and informed the landlord I could break into the property if a new key was not presented.
So I proceeded a few days later to the Tribunal Court Hearing which ended up being several hearings whereby I have now lost any confidence or faith in the tenancy Tribunal process. The claim for exemplary damages regarding unlawful entry was regarded by the adjudicator as being at the "bottom end" of culpability and after clearly demonstrating the malicious and retaliatory nature of the landlords actions the grand sum of $100 was awarded as damages. It will probably cost me more than that to recover the $100 from the landlord.

Strange. Given how pro-tenant the tribunal is, I would have expected a hefty award against the landlord.