Key Takeaways:
- A family was awarded $19,727 in damages after their rental property was found to have high levels of lead contamination, posing a health risk to their young son.
- The property, located on Napier’s Marine Parade, was built in 1900 and had lead-based paint on its external and internal surfaces, as well as in the soil outside.
- The tenants were able to leave the property without penalty after receiving a report from Health New Zealand Te Whatu Ora, which stated that the lead exposure was likely causing harm to their son’s health.
- The property manager, Pukeko Rental Managers, claimed that they had ensured the property was compliant with Healthy Homes standards, but did not routinely test for lead contamination.
- The damages award includes $15,000 in general damages, $4,200 for breach of quiet enjoyment, and $500 for moving costs.
Introduction to the Case
The Tenancy Tribunal has awarded a family $19,727 in damages after their rental property was found to have high levels of lead contamination, posing a health risk to their young son. The property, located on Napier’s Marine Parade, was built in 1900 and had lead-based paint on its external and internal surfaces, as well as in the soil outside. The tenants, whose names are suppressed, had moved into the property in October 2023, but after their son’s blood tests showed dangerously low iron levels and vitamin D deficiency, they arranged for testing to be done on the property.
The Discovery of Lead Contamination
The testing, which was arranged by a doctor and an environmental health officer, found lead in the property’s old yellow and red external paintwork, on most fixed surfaces inside the house, and in the soil outside. A report prepared by Health New Zealand Te Whatu Ora stated that it was highly likely that the son’s lead exposure was due to the paint in the house, and that his age and low iron levels put him at increased risk. The report also noted that there is no safe level of lead exposure, and that long-term exposure can have serious health effects, including growth, cognition, and learning problems.
The Tenants’ Experience
After receiving the report, the property manager, Pukeko Rental Managers, confirmed that the tenants could leave the house without having to give notice. However, the tenants were unable to find alternative accommodation quickly and had to move out in July 2025, nine months after moving into the house and two months after receiving the Health NZ report. During this time, the boy’s mother had a second baby, adding to the family’s stress and difficulty in finding a new home. The Tenancy Tribunal adjudicator, Bryan King, noted that the evidence showed the tenants had suffered anguish and fear for their son’s health and development, and had to find alternative, safe accommodation in difficult circumstances.
The Property Manager’s Response
The property manager, Duncan Reed, claimed that his company had ensured the house was compliant with the Healthy Homes standards, which cover heating, insulation, ventilation, draught-stopping, moisture, and drainage, before the tenants moved in. However, he acknowledged that testing for lead contamination was not a standard practice, and that he had not done so before renting out the property. Reed said that once he found out about the lead, he emailed the tenants to say that they could leave whenever they wanted with "no consequences" in terms of the lease. He also stated that Pukeko Rental Managers no longer managed the property, and that the damages award would be covered by insurance.
The Regulatory Framework
The health and safety regulator WorkSafe has issued guidelines which state that landlords are required to protect occupants and others from lead contamination arising from paintwork in the tenant’s property or its fixtures and fittings. The guidelines also state that landlords, managers, and property owners should assume that paint on pre-1980 buildings is lead-based, unless proven otherwise by records or testing. This case highlights the importance of landlords and property managers taking proactive steps to ensure that their properties are safe and healthy for tenants, particularly when it comes to lead contamination.
Conclusion
The case of the family who was awarded $19,727 in damages after their rental property was found to have high levels of lead contamination serves as a reminder of the importance of prioritizing tenant health and safety. The property manager’s failure to test for lead contamination, despite the property being built in 1900, had serious consequences for the family, particularly their young son. The damages award reflects the harm and distress caused to the family, and serves as a warning to landlords and property managers to take their responsibilities seriously and ensure that their properties are safe and healthy for tenants.