Tenant Awarded Damages for Unlawful Entry and Incomplete Insurance Details
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal awarded damages to the tenant for unlawful entry and incomplete insurance details. The landlord was ordered to pay the tenant $630.57 and return the bond of $750.00. The claim regarding the assignment of tenancy was dismissed.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to exemplary damages for unlawful entry and incomplete insurance details under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
📖 What the law says
This rule states that a landlord cannot enter a rented property while the tenancy agreement is active, unless the tenant agrees at or just before the entry, or if specific situations allow it. These situations include emergencies, or for inspections if the landlord gives proper notice (at least 48 hours but no more than 14 days) and enters between 8 AM and 7 PM, not more than once every four weeks.
This rule requires every tenancy agreement to include certain basic information. This includes the full names and contact addresses of both the landlord and the tenant, the address of the rented property, the dates the agreement and tenancy start, and the landlord's and tenant's addresses for service. It also requires stating if the tenant is under 18 and the amount of any bond and rent.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal awarded damages and compensation to the tenant for unlawful entry and incomplete insurance details, while dismissing the claim regarding the assignment of tenancy.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal awarded damages to the tenant for unlawful entry and incomplete insurance details, while dismissing the claim regarding the assignment of tenancy. The Tribunal found that the landlord's actions were intentional and unjustified, leading to an award of exemplary damages and compensation.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5149137 1
[2025] NZTT 5149137
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT [Event location suppressed]
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Tenant
RESPONDENT: [redacted] Property Management As Agent For [NAME]
Landlord
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant’s name and identifying details.
2. [COMPANY] T/A Rental Managers Property Management As Agent For [NAME] must pay [The tenant/s] $630.57 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:
3. The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $750.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The tenant/s] immediately.
Description Landlord Tenant Exemplary damages – unlawful entry $500.00 Compensation $53.57 Exemplary damages – failure to provide all insurance details
$50.00
Filing fee reimbursement $27.00 Total award $630.57 Bond $750.00 Total payable by Landlord to Tenant $630.57
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5149137 2
Reasons:
1. Both parties attended the hearing which was held by video conference. The landlord was represented by two people and the tenant had a support person with him.
2. This Order follows on from the Tribunal’s previous order dated 8 April 2025 which detailed the claims made by the tenant. I note that at the hearing on that day the landlord advised that they would be making a counterclaim against the tenant and $750.00 bond was retained at the Bond Centre for that purpose.
3. The landlord did not make a counterclaim and so that $750.00 is to be returned to the tenant.
4. The tenant’s claims are addressed below.
Unlawful entry
5. [The tenant/s] claims the landlord has entered the premises without consent or the required notice.
6. A landlord may not enter the premises during the tenancy except with the tenant's consent, in an emergency, or after giving the required notice for inspections and repairs and maintenance. See section 48(1) and (2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
7. Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $1,500.00. See section 48 (4)(a) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
8. The background to this claim is that the tenancy was to commence on 10 November 2023. At 9.03am on that day the landlord notified the tenant that the tenant would not be able to access the property until 11.30am because chattel photos were yet to be taken and the owner of the property had not yet finished preparing the premises for the tenancy.
9. I accept that this was an unlawful act. The tenancy started at 12.01am on 10 November 2023. The tenants had every right of entry after that time and the landlords had no right of entry, except for when notice was given in accordance with the provisions of s48.
10. No such notice was given and consent was not requested from the tenant – the email merely stated that access was not available until 11.30am.
11. Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied 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.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5149137 3
12. The landlord committed this act intentionally. Insufficient notice could not be seen to be accidental or in error.
13. In coming to an award of exemplary damages of $500.00 I have taken into account that the landlord’s intent was to get the premises ready for the new tenant, that the tenant was greatly inconvenienced because he had arranged for help for the whole morning to get into the premises and that help was not available in the afternoon. I have also taken into account the public interest in landlord’s abiding by their obligations and being aware of their obligations under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
14. I have also awarded half a day’s rent in compensation for the tenant not being able to access the property in a timely way.
Incomplete insurance details
15. Section 13A(2)(b)(i) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that that landlord must include in the tenancy agreement information about insurance of the premises, including the amount of excess that is relevant (if any) to liability.
16. Section 13A(1F) provides that a breach of the above section is an unlawful act and therefore an award of exemplary damages may be made. For a breach of this particular kind, exemplary damages of up to $750.00 may be awarded.
17. Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied 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.
18. It was undisputed that the landlord did not include any excess payable in the insurance statement provided to the tenant.
19. While the landlord states that this was in error, I find that there was an intention not to provide it. The landlord would have put their mind to it when completing the statement and then failed to include it in the statement given to the tenant. I say this because all the rest of the insurance statement was filled in appropriately – just not this section.
20. In coming to an award of $50.00 in exemplary damages, I accept that there was no impact whatsoever on the tenant because he only discovered this omission once his tenancy was over.
21. I consider the award of $50.00 is a recognition of the public interest in landlords abiding by all obligations under the Act.
Not approving assignment of tenancy
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5149137 4
22. Section 43B(6) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that when considering assignment of a tenancy by a tenant, the landlord must not withhold consent unreasonably or attach any unreasonable conditions to the consent.
23. The tenant claims $1,500.00 in exemplary damages for this breach and compensation of $4,500.00 for overpaid rent.
24. The brief background to this claim is that on 5 July 2024 the tenant advised the landlord that the current renters of the house that he had bought would like to rent the premises that he was vacating. He did not provide details of these potential renters.
25. By return email the landlord advised they would need to meet the prospective tenant and that in order to progress this assignment the tenant would need to sign a break lease form, a term of which was that $600.00 would have to be paid.
26. The tenant did not sign the break lease form because he considered that it was impossible at that early stage to ascertain the actual costs of the lease break.
27. The assignment was therefore not progressed.
28. Having heard the evidence provided at today’s hearing, I do not consider that the landlord breached s43B(6). The tenant had not provided contact details of the proposed assignees to the landlord, and I accept that paying a break lease fee to be a reasonable condition of considering a possible assignment.
29. This part of the tenant’s claim is therefore dismissed.
Filing fee reimbursement and suppression of name
30. I am ordering the landlord to reimburse the filing fee to the tenant because the tenant was successful in two of the three claims he was making.
31. I am also allowing the tenant’s application for suppression of his name for the same reason.
[NAME] 05 June 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5149137 5
Please read carefully: Visit justice.govt.nz/tribunals/tenancy/rehearings-appeals for more information on rehearings and appeals.
Rehearings You can apply for a rehearing if you believe that a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice has happened. For example: • you did not get the letter telling you the date of the hearing, or • the adjudicator improperly admitted or rejected evidence, or • new evidence, relating to the original application, has become available.
You must give reasons and evidence to support your application for a rehearing. A rehearing will not be granted just because you disagree with the decision. You must apply within five working days of the decision using the Application for Rehearing form: justice.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Forms/TT-Application-for-rehearing.pdf
Right of Appeal Both the landlord and the tenant can file an appeal. You should file your appeal at the District Court where the original hearing took place. The cost for an appeal is $260. You must apply within 10 working days after the decision is issued using this Appeal to the District Court form: justice.govt.nz/tribunals/tenancy/rehearings-appeals
Grounds for an appeal You can appeal if you think the decision was wrong, but not because you don’t like the decision. For some cases, there’ll be no right to appeal. For example, you can’t appeal: • against an interim order • a final order for the payment of less than $1000 • a final order to undertake work worth less than $1000.
Enforcement Where the Tribunal made an order about money or property this is called a civil debt. The Ministry of Justice Collections Team can assist with enforcing civil debt. You can contact the collections team on [PHONE] or go to justice.govt.nz/fines/civil-debt for forms and information.
Notice to a party ordered to pay money or vacate premises, etc. Failure to comply with any order may result in substantial additional costs for enforcement. It may also involve being ordered to appear in the District Court for an examination of your means or seizure of your property.
If you require further help or information regarding this matter, visit tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing- decisions or phone Tenancy Services on [PHONE].
Mēna ka hiahia koe ki ētahi atu awhina, kōrero ranei mo tēnei take, haere ki tenei ipurangi tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions, waea atu ki Ratonga Takirua ma runga [PHONE] ranei.
https://www.justice.govt.nz/tribunals/tenancy/rehearings-appeals https://www.justice.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Forms/TT-Application-for-rehearing.pdf https://www.justice.govt.nz/tribunals/tenancy/rehearings-appeals/ https://www.justice.govt.nz/fines/about-civil-debt/ https://www.tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions https://www.tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions http://www.tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5149137 6
A manaomia nisi faamatalaga poo se fesoasoani, e uiga i lau mataupu, asiasi ifo le matou aupega tafailagi: tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions, pe fesootai mai le Tenancy Services i le numera [PHONE].
Reasons:
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The landlord entered the premises without consent or proper notice, which is an unlawful act.
- The landlord failed to provide complete insurance details as required by law.
- The landlord intentionally omitted the excess payable in the insurance statement.
- The tenant was awarded exemplary damages for the landlord's intentional breaches of the Residential Tenancies Act.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The landlord's refusal to approve the assignment of tenancy was deemed reasonable by the court.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tenancy Tribunal awarded damages to the tenant for unlawful entry and incomplete insurance details, while dismissing the claim regarding the assignment of tenancy.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about the landlord entering the premises unlawfully and failing to provide complete insurance details in the tenancy agreement.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided in favour of the tenant, finding that the landlord's actions were intentional and unjustified, leading to an award of exemplary damages and compensation.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, sections 48, 13A, and 43B were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the landlord's actions were intentional and unjustified, leading to an award of exemplary damages and compensation.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the person who brought the case, the tenant.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation may be entitled to damages if their landlord enters the premises unlawfully or fails to provide complete insurance details in the tenancy agreement.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The judgment does not specify the exact evidence or documents that mattered.