[3] The Tribunal was not provided with a copy of the tenancy agreement.

[4] An application for compensation under s. 209 of the RTA cannot be made until 14 days after service of the breach of duty notice and an application for compensation under s 210 of the RTA cannot be made until the tenancy has ended (see [210.01] of the VCAT Annotated Residential Tenancies Act, ANSTAT).

[5] The application was made under ss 417, 418, 419 and 210 of the RTA respectively.

[6] In breach of ss. 61 and 63 of the RTA.

[7] Reardon v. Ministry of Housing - unreported, Supreme Court of Victoria, 13 November 1992 per Justice Smith, as cited in EL v. EA [2006] VCAT 2049 per Deputy President Steele (as she then was).

[8] See for example Davies v Tereke [2015] VCAT 92 and Micallef v Todio [2014] VCAT 976.

[9] See for example Randall v De Fraga [2015] VCAT 458.

[10] Ms Ball's loss was also described by her solicitors as a "loss of quiet enjoyment" or a "loss of quiet enjoyment". Nothing turns on the description of the loss.

[15] Ms Ball explained that she and Mr Bezzina separated shortly after they moved into the rented premises and that after he moved out in around September 2012, she was uncertain whether or not she could continue to pay the rent on her own.

[16] At a hearing of the landlords' application for a possession order due to rent arrears that was listed for the following day.

[17] Hicks v Pradolin [2015] VCAT 20.

[18] Other than the email from Ms Ball to Ms Attard dated 8 May 2014 that Ms Ball's solicitors provided to the tribunal on the third day of the hearing after inspecting Mr Baatjes' file.

[20] S. 72 of the RTA.

[21] S. 73 of the RTA.

[22] Sections 74 and 75 of the RTA.

[23] Sections 208 and 209 of the RTA.

[24] As required by s. 66 of the RTA.

[25] This evidence is consistent with Ms Ball's evidence that much of the damage done to the walls and doors in the rented premises during the tenancy was done by Mr Bezzina.

[26] Pialba Commercial Gardens Pty Ltd v Braxco Pty Ltd & Ors [2011] QCA 148 per Wilson AJA at paragraphs 95 to 97.

[27] As defined by s. 3 of the RTA.

[28] Ms Ball did not rely on either of these emails in relation to the stove top claim.

[29] As defined by s. 3 of the RTA.

[30] Whilst this email suggests that Mr Lacey had been aware of the faulty kitchen mixer tap since December 2011, Ms Ball did not make any claim for compensation before 29 March 2012.

[31] There was no evidence to suggest that the faulty switch and power points could be described as a "dangerous electrical fault" or "unsafe" under s. 3 of the RTA.