In his decision, tribunal adjudicator John Greene said it was self-evident that a car garage was unlawful residential premises.
“The landlord accepted that. The premises are not consented for residential use.”
The garage was at the rear of the Christchurch property owned by Caballero, where he and his wife lived.
According to the decision, he and the tenant met at work and became friendly.
Caballero told the tribunal that the tenant “begged him” to stay, but the only place available was his garage, as they were already renting a room in their house to a couple.
The tenant moved into the garage in September 2025. It had no kitchen or bathroom facilities, so the tenant used an induction cooker and Caballero’s toilet and shower facilities.
The tenant moved out in late May 2026 after Caballero proposed the rent increase.
Caballero told the tribunal his wife became unhappy with the tenant’s electricity use, so he asked for an increase of $10 without notice.
The tenant sought advice from the Community Law Centre, which advised him that the premises were unlawful, leading to his application to the tribunal.
The tenant told the tribunal that the garage was cold and draughty and situated next to Caballero’s chicken coop, so he was interrupted by the sound of the chickens.
While acknowledging the premises were unlawful for residential use, Caballero responded that the tenant elected to live there, could have moved at any time, and that he was doing the tenant a favour by letting him rent the garage.
Greene ordered Caballero to pay the tenant $2775 for a 50% refund of rent, recognising that the tenant gained some benefit from living at the premises despite it being unlawful.
He also awarded the tenant exemplary damages of $1500 for the breaches of his responsibilities, and compensation of $1500 for the effects of the unlawful premises on the tenant and his other losses.
While Greene found that Caballero unlawfully increased the rent, the tenant did not pay the increased amount, so no compensation was awarded for that aspect.
The tenant also alleged that Caballero ended the tenancy in a retaliatory manner, but Greene ruled that Caballero did not give notice to terminate the tenancy and rather verbally suggested it should end.
Without a notice of termination, the tribunal could not make a declaration, and that claim was also dismissed.
During the hearing, Caballero raised issues about the tenant.
He alleged the tenant had caused damage to a wall, left goods and rubbish behind, used some of his wife’s kitchen utensils, and cut his roses.
But Greene said there was no landlord application before the tribunal, so it could not address those claims.
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.
Join the NZ Herald’s Open Justice team for Case by Case, a video and podcast series examining the disputes and decisions making headlines across New Zealand.