Share and Follow
FED up tenants took their landlord to court over a very common rental problem and won $14,000 in compensation after their life was made hell.
A New South Wales landlord was ordered to pay the heavy fine after the property they were meant to look after was covered in mould.
The annoyed tenants claimed the rent they were forced to pay was over the top and wanted compensation for the mouldy, damp and depressing apartment they had to live in.
They applied to a Civil and Administrative Tribunal earlier this year as their two-bedroom villa apartment was being repaired after water damage and mould had left it unlivable.
The tribunal heard the dangerous affects that living in a house with mould can cause as the tenants faced health scares due to the issues.
A spokesperson on the tribunal said: “The tenants have submitted that the mould and fungal growth was unsightly, malodorous, and caused the tenants skin and eye irritation and respiratory distress.”
The Aussie tenants moved into the property in December 2019, paying $960 a fortnight as part of their 14 month contract.
They first reported water issues in February 2020, and made several other reports across two whole years until October 2022 when they were finally looked into.
A spokesperson detailed the issues saying: “The source of the leaks were failures of the roof and water proofing in the common property of the Strata Scheme.
“The water ingress caused water trickles down a wall, through a window, and minor flooding of floor surfaces particularly during heavy rain, which was frequent during this period.”
“The water tracked beneath the wooden floors and skirtings causing some detachment and extensive mould and fungal growth in the underfloor area which broke through the floor surface as black staining.”
By October 2022, the wooden floors and the skirting boards were badly damaged and one wall was in a very poor condition.
They had warped and split and had become damp and severely covered in mould.
The tenants also said the mould had spread and damaged clothing, personal goods and furniture.
The tribunal heard the property manager reported the issue to the strata manager and asked for immediate action to fix the problem.
Work didn’t start until December 2022 however and ended in February 2023, forcing the tenants to move out of the apartment for over two months.
At the time, they were still paying rent at the normal price.
The landlord argued that she had increased most other properties she owned but left their apartment at the same price because of the damage and repairs.
Meaning the tenants were actually paying a lower amount than they should’ve been.
She also said the tenants had exaggerated their claims about the damage to the property and their personal things.
In his decision handed down last month, senior member of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal, Philip French, agreed that the tenants were overpaying for a property they couldn’t even live in and deserved compensation.
He said the damage was due to the landlord’s breaches of contract.
After ordering the landlord to pay her tenants $14,766 he said: “The tenants experienced a significant reduction in their use of the premises due to water ingress, damp, and mould.”
