July 2025 - McCaw Lewis

As of 1 July 2025, all new and existing rental properties are required to comply with the healthy homes standards (the Standards). A 2024 survey by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development Te Tūāpapa Kura Kāinga revealed that while most landlords are aware that there are financial penalties for non-compliance with the Standards, only 31% knew the extent of possible penalties. Compounding the problem, nearly half of renters said their home had potential non-compliance issues.

To date, there have been over 300 decisions in 2025 that mention or discuss the Standards. This article provides a quick snapshot of how the Tenancy Tribunal (the Tribunal) has been handling non-compliance with the Standards.

Why do landlords need to comply?

The Standards are aimed at reducing the gap in quality between owner-occupied homes and rental properties. The regulations include minimum standards for heating, insulation, ventilation, moisture ingress (dampness) and drainage, and draught stopping, with enforcement of the Standards overseen by the Tribunal.

Are landlords complying?

A survey released in 2024 by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development Te Tūāpapa Kura Kāinga found that:

95% of landlords were aware of the Standards, but only 76% of tenants were;
73% of landlords said they had done something in preparation for the deadline to meet the Standards;
82% of landlords were aware there are financial penalties for non-compliance, but only 31% of landlords knew the potential extent of the penalties. 64% said the penalties were influential in their compliance;
44% of renters believed their homes had a problem with dampness or mould, while 42% had a problem heating and/or keeping the home warm in winter.

What is the Tribunal?

The Tribunal oversees enforcement of the Standards. Over 300 Tribunal decisions in 2025 contain some discussion around landlords complying with the Standards.

What are the penalties?

Compensation

Where a breach of Standards is found, a landlord can be required to pay compensation to the tenant. The compensation amount varies depending on the severity of the breaches, and are most often ordered in the form of a weekly rent reduction, for the period of the breach. In other words, the longer the breach takes to be remedied, the higher the compensation order will be.

Cases where compensation was awarded:

[2025] NZTT 5191799 – A rental property was found to have a lack of underfloor insulation and ground moisture barrier. The Tribunal ordered compensation of $1,040 to be paid, representing $20 per week of the tenancy period. It was held that the landlord had believed it was compliant with the Standards, so no exemplary damages were ordered.
[2025] NZTT 5156092 – Issues including mould and a broken window led to compensation of a rent reduction of $32 per week, for the 157 weeks of the tenancy (approximately $5,000).

Exemplary Damages

Exemplary damages can also be awarded to the tenant (on top of any compensation), with a maximum penalty of $7,200.

Exemplary damages are reserved for intentional breaches of the Standards, and are viewed as a punitive measure to help deter other egregious abuse of the Standards. Before awarding exemplary damages, the Tribunal must be 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.

Cases where exemplary damages were awarded:

[2025] NZTT 5027846 – The landlord had breached all obligations under section 45 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The Tribunal followed a District Court decision that held the maximum penalty is intended to be a total award for all breaches. Accordingly, $7,200 was ordered to be paid along with compensation equal to three weeks rent for the “significant and negative impact the breaches had on the tenant’s use and enjoyment of the premises”.
[2025] NZTT 5050049 – After a first assessment, a property partially complied with the Standards, but had failed on the heating, insulation, ventilation and draughts. Following a second assessment, the property failed on those same standards. The breaches were found to be intentional and $3,500 was awarded to the tenant for exemplary damages.
[2025] NZTT 5153389 – Failure to install a heat pump in the living area or remedy gaps in doors and windows (despite requests from the tenant) meant that the landlord had intentionally not complied with the Standards, and was liable for $2,400 for exemplary damages.
[2025] NZTT 5156999 – The landlord agreed to install a heater to meet the heating standard, which was never actioned. The Tribunal found an unlawful act had occurred and ordered $2,000 for exemplary damages.
[2025] NZTT 4956715 – A rent reduction of $50 per week was awarded for a failure to install a kitchen extractor fan, totalling $1,400. Exemplary damages of $2,500 were also ordered for failure to meet the ventilation standard and $2,000 for not meeting the heating standard by failing to install a sufficient heater.

Where to next?

We regularly field questions regarding the Standards, from initial discussions through to Tribunal hearings. If you have concerns in relation to compliance with the Standards, please contact one of our experts today.

Andrew is a Senior Solicitor in our Dispute Resolution Team and can be contacted on 07 958 7447.

Proposed changes to the Employment Relations Act 2000 (ERA) would limit personal grievance rights for employees earning over $180,000—unless their employment agreement says otherwise. This article explains the current law, what is proposed, and what it means for those affected.

Current Law

Under the ERA, all employees — regardless of salary — can raise a personal grievance if they consider they have been unjustifiably dismissed or disadvantaged. An employee may claim they have been unjustifiably dismissed if their employer terminated employment without reasonable basis and/or without following a fair process. Unjustified disadvantage in employment is a wide-ranging claim capturing any action or omission by the employer that unjustifiably disadvantages the employee in their employment.

Remedies currently available to employees include reinstatement, reimbursement of lost wages, compensation for hurt and humiliation, and costs.

Proposed Reform

The proposed reform — currently before Parliament — would limit access to personal grievance rights for unjustified dismissal and/or unjustified disadvantage where an employee earns over $180,000 gross per annum (adjusted annually for inflation).

Employees earning above the income threshold would not be entitled to raise a personal grievance for unjustified dismissal and/or unjustified disadvantage, unless:

Their employment agreement expressly provides for it; or
The grievance relates to any protected grounds – discrimination, sexual harassment, or union related duress.

Employers and high earners could agree to preserve grievance rights, but this would need to be clearly documented in the employment agreement.

High earners would still retain the right to pursue claims under the Human Rights Act 1993, Privacy Act 2020, or for breach of contract.

Reform Rationale

The Government explains the rationale behind the reform is that:

High income earners are better resourced to negotiate contractual protections – they typically hold more bargaining power and access to legal advice.
Statutory protections may be less necessary where tailored, negotiated agreements are in place.

The goal is to reduce strain on the Courts and encourage high earners to rely on negotiated contract terms instead of default statutory protections.

Implications for Employees

Employees over the income threshold will need to take care when negotiating the terms of their employment agreements. Employees should check that their employment agreement provides the right to raise a personal grievance for unjustified dismissal and unjustified disadvantage. If it does not, the employee may have no recourse if, for example, they are treated unfairly or their employment is terminated unfairly.

While negotiating power may be strong for employees entering a new employment relationship, those in existing relationships will not hold the same leverage. There would be a 12 month transition period for existing employees and employers to negotiate terms.

Implications for Employers

Employers can expect a reduction in personal grievances (relating to dismissal and disadvantage) from high income employees. High income employees may start pushing for built in protection and be more focused on negotiating robust agreements at the outset of employment. Employees may look to protect themselves with enhanced notice periods, severance payments and waivers of restraints of trade.

Going Forward

The Employment Relations (Termination of Employment by Agreement) Amendment Bill is still in the Select Committee stage, with the Committee report expected by 8 October 2025. Accordingly, change is not imminent – the earliest we could expect the Bill to pass is late 2025.

Whether the Bill is passed or not, we recommend reaching out to our team to discuss your employment agreements and whether specific clauses should be added or removed to best suit your situation.

Employment Law Assistance

Our Workplace Law Team are able to assist with all employment processes and any other bespoke employment queries that you may have.

Chantelle is an Associate in our Workplace Law Team and can be contacted on 07 958 7473.

Month: July 2025

Healthy Homes Standards – Who Is Complying?

High Income Earners and Personal Grievances: Understanding the Proposed Reform

Contact us

HAMILTON OFFICE

TE KŪITI OFFICE