APIA Blog

RSS Feed

Can tenant be reimbursed for piped water when the water tank fails?

Monday, October 12, 2020
IMG SOURCE: UPSLASH 

This week's question comes from Anonymous:  

My tenant (from 2016 to 2020) has made a Tribunal application against me. She is claiming, among other things, reimbursement of water rates due to the roof and gutters not being cleaned rendering the water tank unusable. Is that a valid claim? 

Without further information, we assume the following:

  • That the property has both reticulated water supply and a water tank; 
  • The tenancy is not provided on the basis that the property is on tank water only; 
  • That the property complies with all building, health and safety requirements irrespective of the landlord's failure to clean the roof and gutters; and 
  • That the tenant is seeking reimbursement for only variable/consumption-based water charges.
We suspect the tenant is seeking to base her claim on one or more of the following sections of the Residential Tenancies Act: 
  • s45(1)(b) The landlord shall provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair having regard to the age and character of the premises and the period during which the premises are likely to remain habitable and available for residential purposes.
  • s45(1)(ca) The landlord shall if the premises do not have a reticulated water supply, provide adequate means for the collection and storage of water. 
  • s45(2)The landlord shall not interfere with the supply of gas, electricity, water, telephone services, or other services to the premises, except where the interference is necessary to avoid danger to any person or to enable maintenance or repairs to be carried out. 
Breaching any of the above subsections is unlawful. The maximum penalties are $4,000 for each of s45(1)(b) and s45(1)(ca) and $1,000 for s45(2). 


Seeing that the tenant has been charged and paid for water rates, we assume the property has a reticulated water supply that is uninterrupted therefore s45(1)(ca) and s45(2) would not apply. We then consider whether the landlord has breached s45(1)(b) by failing to clean the roof and gutters. Without further information (e.g. records of communication, 14-day breach notices, pictures evidencing disrepair) we hesitate to draw a conclusion one way or another (as an aside, we suspect not as if there is a breach then surely the tenant's complaint would more likely be related to weathertightness of the house rather than simply interruption to tank water supply). However, even if s45(1)(b) has been breached, the correct response is for the tenant to issue the landlord with a 14-day notice to fix and upon the landlord's failure to respond to that notice, apply to the Tribunal seeking an award of up to $4,000.  There is no mechanism for the tenant to be reimbursed for alternate water supply when one supply source fails. Note also that the tenant is not eligible for a s45(1)(d) compensation because she has not repaired the premises.  

We don't see the tenant as likely to succeed with her claim for reimbursement. That said, if the Tribunal is to determine that an unlawful act has been committed in this instance, exemplary damage will be awarded to the tenant without her having to ask for it. 

Do you have any tenancy related questions? Write to us at admin@apia.org.nz or hit us up on our social channels here and here

 

 

 

 

Recent Posts


Tags

off the plan bond election 2017 sale and purchas How to heat pump mindset lvr ocr negotiation quiet enjoyment bankruptcy warm up new zealand CoreLogic investor boarding house water bill Investor story Q&A parry v inglis commerce commission tenant opes partners property maintenance Editor's Choice will buying auckland insulation winz first home buying Jeff Bezos barfoot and thompson unitary plan skill shortage Investment tip tenancy services ird building property apprentice nzpif initio gluckman report auckland council rental wof housing package daikin election2020 television tax shower dome structure maintenance airbnb re agent warren buffett property inspection subdivision clnz government Market report CCC covid-19 advice property management Question and answer education buying rules wins heating partners insurance Kris Pedersen Mortgages and Insurance investment strategy legal cost HHGA meth contamination interest deductibility letting asbestos cat tenancy tribunal Level 4 beginner investor rent damage travel bubble khh landlord letting fee TCIT market rent capital gain wealth creation recycling equity ask an expert anz retaliatory notice reserve bank debt to income rta income market buyer's agent short term rental return meth extractor fan equity p lab Standards New Zealand property value management speculator robert kiyosaki rent control bond form RBNZ interest rates trust holiday house heater Landlording rental market rent arrears Must knows housing affordability yield renovation Property (Relationships) Act Must know kiwibuild legal Case study RTAA 2019 principal and interest trademe rtaa2020 shortland chartered accountants bad tenant short-term rental tenancy issues smoke alarm twg report termination Sponsored post early termination HHS personal growth ring-fencing rta reform finance sublease financial advisers act apia Zodiak Management productivity fixed-term tenancy data security banking scotney williams trespass Gluckman ventilation housing bubble sale and purchase cash-flow brightline interest limitation rent increase HSWA minor dwelling watercare development house prices anti-social behaviour positive cash flow relationship DTI business interest only Tribunal case study privacy Guest blog LIM Holler worksafe mortgage debt enforcement property cycle cgt

Archive

Introducing Our Partners
Principal Sponsor - Kris Pedersen Mortgages & Insurance logo Gold Sponsor - Barfoot & Thompson logo Gold Sponsor - CoreLogic logo Property Apprentice logo The Insulation Warehouse logo The Renovation Team logo The New Zealand Property Investors' Federation logo