“Nor to bring a newborn baby into this environment.”
The tenant, who has name suppression, applied to the Tenancy Tribunal to be released from the fixed-term tenancy as she had an unforeseen change in circumstances and the health of her family continued to decline.
Tribunal adjudicator Nicole Walker ruled in her favour saying the tenant moved into a garage to live with her children and was unable to afford another tenancy because she has continued to pay rent for this tenancy.
“The landlord has failed to maintain the premises and is in breach of the Healthy Homes standards. I find they have committed an unlawful act.”
Not ‘medically appropriate’
The tenant claimed that the landlord’s failure to comply with the Healthy Homes standards had a significant impact on the health of her and her three children, two teenagers and a preschooler.
The tenant provided the tribunal with a number of doctor’s notes in support of the impact of the living conditions on her family.
A letter from the tenant’s Lead Maternity Carer, when the tenant was 29 weeks pregnant, said it was not “medically appropriate” for the tenant or her children to remain in the housing, nor for her baby to live there when it was born.
A letter from the children’s health service said “the whānau are experiencing significant ongoing skin infections due to the presence of mould, rodent droppings, contamination of broken-down pink batt material and notable dampness.
“In my medical opinion, it is not safe for [the tenant’s son] and his whānau to continue living at this property.”
In January 2026, a doctor said the family suffered from recurrent skin infections and possible scabies, with symptoms first showing in May 2025.
“It is my medical opinion that damp housing and contamination with rodent droppings and mould is the cause of this.”
In a letter from a doctor in February, it said prolonged exposure to a damp mould-affected environment was highly likely to have contributed significantly to the tenant’s recurrent skin infections and ongoing skin irritation.
“Damp indoor conditions and mould contamination are well-recognised risk factors for skin and other health conditions. There was also fibreglass from damp insulation.
“Since vacating the property on January 12, there has been a marked and dramatic improvement in my patient and her children’s skin health.”
Photographs of body parts from all family members showed welts and rashes, and inflamed, irritated and infected skin.
A Healthy Homes Assessment report dated February 25, 2026, found that the premises did not comply with the Healthy Homes insulation standards, moisture ingress and drainage standard, and the draught stopping standard.
Tenant had taken landlord to tribunal before
Walker said the main issue contributing to the health problems for the tenant and her family seemed to be a brick or block wall on the bottom storey of the home.
Photographs produced by the tenant show bubbling underneath the paintwork and mould spores growing on the paint.
A piece of board of the ceiling above the hot water cupboard, which looked like it was originally the backing of a framed picture, had fallen from the hole in the ceiling and both insulation and rat droppings had fallen into the hot water cupboard.
“The tenant stores blankets and linen in this cupboard which has become contaminated by both the insulation and the rat droppings,” Walker said.
The majority of the tenant’s belongings were still at the rental. Because of the contamination of the premises from mould, loose insulation fibres and rat droppings, the tenant had to replace all soft furnishings, including beds, bedding, sofa and items purchased for her baby.
“I consider that an award of compensation of $2500 is reasonable for the replacement of soft furnishings,” Walker said.
The tenant had previously been to the tribunal and a ruling made in November 2024 included an award of compensation for loss of amenity in respect of the bedroom downstairs when the tenant discovered the gib was soft and bulging because of water ingress.
“The landlord has been aware of the water ingress issue but has not taken any steps to address the problem other than to carry out cosmetic measures to disguise the problem by installing gib and painting the brick wall,” Walker said.
“The work carried out in July 2024 temporarily stopped the effects of the water ingress but the impact on the tenant and her family from May 2025 was significant.
“I accept that the landlord’s failure to maintain the premises has impacted negatively on the tenant and her family in a situation where the landlord knew there was an issue but either mistakenly thought that the tenant was responsible for maintenance or thought that the cost to maintain outweighed the effect on the tenant.”
The tenant had made six rent payments since moving out of the premises, totalling $4500.
Given the previous involvement of the tribunal in relation to this issue, Walker awarded $6000 for exemplary damages. The tenant was also refunded $4500 in rent payments.
“As this order determines that the tenancy is reduced to end on January 12, 2026, the tenant is refunded the rent she has paid since that date.”
Hong did not attend the tribunal hearing and was ordered to pay $13,028 to the tenant for exemplary damages and a rent refund. She did not respond when contacted by NZME.
Brianna McIlraith is a Queenstown-based reporter for Open Justice covering courts in the lower South Island. She has been a journalist since 2018 and has had a strong interest in business and financial journalism.