Annie Gu has been to the Tenancy Tribunal over problems with her units in this Hamilton complex.

Hamilton landlord Annie Gu says she's gradually selling off her rental properties because the rental system is stacked against her.

She has recently been through the Tenancy Tribunal over problems with three of her properties.

"There's no logic. You cannot win. Even the evidence I give in court, they just argue it."

In one case, she signed up tenants to move into a newly built house, paying $600 a week. The tenancy was meant to start on May 4.

READ MORE:

* Government hikes claims thresholds for bad landlords, increases renters rights

* Tenants awarded $1470 for rats, mould, peeling paint and inadequate insulation

* New rules take effect for rental property market

The tenants hade specific preferences for the fitout of the kitchen, which Gu had incorporated into the build.

But delays caused by a public holiday meant the house was not ready when it was meant to be.

Confusion over a text exchange led to problems.

Gu sent a message saying: "Peter [the builder] said it is better if you can book around 22/05".

The tenants responded, "Hi Annie, it's been difficult to organise a moving company as the dates have changed yet again."

What must landlords do when they rent out a house?

She replied: "The date is not change. It is just after 14/05 like I told you. That's why I get confused."

Gu told the Tenancy Tribunal that she had told the tenants the builder suggested they move on May 22 but that May 14 would also be possible if necessary.

The tenants said they were given the impression that they were not allowed to move in until the 22nd.

That was a problem because they had to leave their former home, which was being sold, on May 18.

Do you have a story to share? Email susan.edmunds@stuff.co.nz

They spoke to the agent who was selling their former property and discovered an investor had bought it. They decided to enter a discussion about staying.

Gu discovered this conversation - which she said began earlier than the tenants were admitting - and sent a text, cancelling their agreement with her.

She sought $4500 in compensation for the cost of the additional kitchen fitout but gave up this claim when the tribunal said that the agreement allowed for the tenancy to be terminated with just three weeks' notice, which would have left her in the same position.

She also sought compensation for loss of rent but was declined.

In another case heard by the tribunal this year, she was found to have issued a retaliatory 90-day notice to tenants and ordered to pay $500 in exemplary damages to two of them.

She successfully appealed a restraining order.

The tenants told the tribunal she threatened to terminate their tenancy when they disputed or complained about something.

"They believed that the termination was issued because they took her to the tribunal, asserted their rights as tenants and she was upset they would not pay an account for electrical damages," the ruling said.

They also claimed she breached their privacy and quiet enjoyment.

She had tried to move them to "Hamilton Garden Motel Guest and Landlord Agreement for Short Term Tenants", arguing that they were in temporary accommodation and the Residential Tenancies Act should not apply. They had lived there for between two and five years each.

Gu said the Tenancy Tribunal would "spoil tenants" and treat landlords unfairly.

"That's why the housing problem is getting worse and worse."

She said she was in the process of painting and recarpeting one of her flats with a view to selling it.

She had approached Housing New Zealand about buying it. The others would be sold over time, she said.