Full Breakdown
Rotorua Tenancy Tribunal Orders Landlords Stephen and Jasu Bhana to Pay Exemplary Damages and Impose Six-Year Restraining Order
6/6/2026, 5:39:17 AM
Tribunal Findings and Penalties
The Tenancy Tribunal, chaired by adjudicator Mikail Steens, issued a public order against Stephen Bhana and Jasu Bhana, trustees of the Ranolf Trust. The Tribunal dismissed the landlords’ claim for compensation and instead found them liable for multiple breaches: failure to maintain the premises, omission of a chattels list, and provision of false Healthy Homes information. The order requires payment of $5,800 in exemplary damages—$4,500 for maintenance failures, $750 for the missing chattels list, and $550 for misleading Healthy Homes statements—and imposes a six-year restraining order under the Residential Tenancies Act, barring further similar unlawful conduct.
Background of the Bhana Landlord Disputes
The Bhanas have a history of tenancy disputes in Rotorua. In a 2024 case, Stephen Bhana was ordered to pay $12,000 in exemplary damages to the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment for breaches that included rainwater leakage and overcharging rent. The current order references a pattern of non-compliance across multiple tenancies, prompting the Tribunal to act to protect future renters.
Key Parties Involved
- Stephen Bhana – landlord, trustee of the Ranolf Trust.
- Jasu Bhana – co-landlord, trustee of the Ranolf Trust.
- Mikail Steens – Tenancy Tribunal adjudicator.
- Meredith Herbert – tenant’s legal representative, Rotorua District Community Law Centre.
- Forensic handwriting expert – identified forged signatures on an inspection report.
- Tenant – name suppressed; paid $690 weekly rent versus a market rate of $473 for a comparable two-bedroom unit.
Evidence of Property Defects and Misrepresentations
The tenant supplied a Healthy Homes report documenting extensive defects: water-damaged kitchen and laundry cabinetry, leaking sink, broken back-door lock, mould, non-functioning extractor fan, broken bedroom window, and pervasive dampness. The landlord provided only a generic compliance statement, which the Tribunal deemed misleading. A forensic handwriting analysis concluded that signatures on an inspection report, purportedly from the tenant, were “consistent with the handwriting of the landlord, Stephen Bhana,” undermining the Bhanas’ claim of tenant-caused damage.
Official Tribunal Rationale
Steens emphasized that the defects “directly affect habitability, safety, and basic amenity,” and that the landlords’ evidence lacked credibility, especially given the forged signatures. He described the Bhanas’ conduct as “crossed the line,” necessitating removal to restore order. The six-year restraining order reflects the Tribunal’s assessment of repeated non-compliance and its intent to protect future tenants.
Criticism and Opposition
During the hearing, Stephen Bhana accused the tenant’s lawyer of corruption and alleged bias by the adjudicator, and repeatedly pointed a finger at Meredith Herbert, prompting security intervention. The Tribunal rejected these allegations as unfounded and disruptive.
Conflicting Evidence and Gaps
The landlords asserted that the tenant damaged specific chattels, citing an inspection report. The tenant countered with evidence of seeking assistance from Work and Income for appliance replacement and presented the Healthy Homes report. The forensic analysis contradicted the landlords’ claim, creating a direct conflict over the authenticity of the inspection signatures.
Verbatim Quotes
- “Mr Bhana arrived at the hearing with bundles of paperwork, but it soon became apparent that he was not very well organised and was ill-prepared for the hearing.” — Mikail Steens
- “At one point, he stood over the tenant’s representative [Herbert] and, pointing his finger at her, and with a raised voice, made serious accusations against her.” — Mikail Steens
- “The defects identified are too numerous, too significant and too persistent to be dismissed as minor inconveniences.” — Mikail Steens
- “consistent with the handwriting of the landlord, Stephen Bhana” — Forensic handwriting expert
- “The pattern matters here ... Future tenants should not be exposed to the same conduct.” — Mikail Steens
Implications for Tenancy Law
The order underscores the Tribunal’s willingness to impose exemplary damages and long-term restraining orders when landlords repeatedly breach Healthy Homes standards and tenant rights. It signals heightened scrutiny of landlord documentation and reinforces the legal requirement for accurate chattels inventories and compliance statements.
Upcoming Oversight
The decision may prompt further investigations by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment into the Bhanas’ broader tenancy portfolio, as well as potential criminal proceedings should the restraining order be breached.
