Tenant's pregnancy rebuff costs $5000

A woman who claimed she was denied tenancy of a house because she was pregnant has been awarded $5000 in damages.

Landlord Mario Miletich was found to have breached the Human Rights Act by refusing the woman the chance to take over the lease of the Auckland property, understood to be in Sandringham.

At the time of the refusal the woman was affected by asthma, pregnancy-related diabetes and epilepsy.

She took the matter to the Human Rights Commission, which brought it before the Complaints Review Tribunal.

The tribunal's written decision said the woman's mother was renting the two-bedroom property and had sublet the other room. After becoming sick, the mother left Auckland to convalesce and with Mr Miletich's consent, she sublet her own room to her daughter.

When it became clear late in 1997 that the mother would not be returning, she asked Mr Miletich to let her daughter take over the tenancy. But he turned her down.

Mr Miletich maintained that he refused because he had been tricked into the subletting arrangement and the women had always intended that the daughter would take up the tenancy.

He denied knowing that the daughter was pregnant until after he had made his decision.

But the tribunal said it preferred the evidence of the women, and concluded that the major reason for refusing to let the daughter rent the house was that she was pregnant.

In its decision, the tribunal said Mr Miletich had told the women he did not want children in the house.

"He made it clear to both women that he did not approve of the complainant being unmarried and pregnant."

Human Rights Commission proceedings commissioner Chris Lawrence said yesterday that the case showed discrimination was occurring in the private rental market.

In this case, it had been directed at a young woman because she was pregnant but it also happened on racial grounds.

Landlords needed to be aware that if they acted in a discriminatory way they could end up paying damages.