What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4488308 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

How much money was awarded in case 4488308?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $80.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,228.57 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4488308?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4488308?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/8760609-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4488308 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

How much money was awarded in case 4488308?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $80.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,228.57 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4488308?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4488308?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/8760609-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

109 Waiau Crescent, Kingswell, Invercargill 9812 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4488308 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4488308 — net $2,329.01 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$2,228.57	Rent arrears
Lawns and Garden work	$80.00	Lawns and Garden work
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,329.01
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,329.01

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details.
[The tenant/s] must pay Inspire Property Management Limited As Agent For Olivia Ryder Family Trust $2,329.01 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

Ms Overend attended the hearing by teleconference on behalf of the landlord. [The tenant/s], the tenant, also attended the hearing by teleconference.
The landlord initially applied for termination on the grounds of abandonment and for rent arrears. Whilst there was no formal claim for compensation originally, the landlord provided copies of invoices for lawn mowing and methamphetamine testing, in the application.
At the start of the hearing, the landlord withdrew their claim for termination, indicating that the tenant has left the property.
Any party bringing a claim before the Tenancy Tribunal has the burden of proving their claim on the balance of probabilities. They must prove it is more likely than not that their alleged version of events took place. Further, the evidence should be reasonable with no probable defects, such as inconsistency or improbability. The evidence should be consistent and supported by other acceptable evidence.

How much is owed for rent?

This is a fixed term tenancy that ended on 13 February 2023.
The tenant, [The tenant/s], said that she left the property fully on 26 December 2022, after giving two weeks’ notice to the landlord on 14 December 2022.
The tenant said that when she gave notice to the landlord on 14 December 2022, she did not understand that she had entered a fixed term tenancy but does now. She said she is prepared to pay the rent that is owed but would like to do that on a payment plan, as she has children to support. The tenant does not dispute the amount of rent arrears claimed by the landlord.
Section 50(1)(a) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”) provides that in the case of a fixed-term tenancy, the tenancy shall terminate on the expiry of the term of the tenancy, unless other exceptions apply. None of the specified exceptions in section 50(1)(a) RTA apply here.
The tenant did not apply to reduce the fixed term tenancy, either formally with the landlord or by application to the Tribunal. The notice provided by the tenant was inadequate, even for a periodic tenancy, though this tenancy is fixed-term. The tenant left the property on 26 December 2023, without providing adequate notice to the landlord.
Ms Overend said that the property was re-tenanted on 7 February 2023. Therefore, I find that the tenant is liable for rent to 6 February 2023, the day before the new tenancy began.
The landlord provided rent records proving that the amount owing in rent to 7 February 2023 is $2,285.71. As I find the tenant is liable for rent to 6 February 2023, I deduct one day’s rent from this amount. Weekly rent is $400.00 so daily rent is $57.14. Therefore, the tenant owes $2,228.57 in rent to 6 February 2023. Is the tenant responsible for the cost of garden maintenance at the end of the tenancy?
At the end of the tenancy the tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, remove all rubbish, return all keys and security devices, and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
In the Tenancy Agreement, the tenant was responsible for mowing the lawns and maintaining the garden. The landlord claimed $80.00 for the cost of a lawn mowing service to mow the lawns and weed the garden after the tenancy terminated in early February 2023, and provided an invoice in this amount.
The tenant said that she had mowed the lawns, weeded the garden and cleaned up the house, before moving out on 26 December 2023.
Whilst I accept that it is more likely than not that the tenant would have mowed the lawns and weeded the garden before she moved out on 26 December 2023, obviously the condition of the lawns and garden would have deteriorated between then and the end of the tenancy on 6 February 2023, without further attention from the tenant. In my view, despite the landlord not providing any photographic or exit report evidence of the condition of the garden at the end of the tenancy, it is more likely than not that the lawns would have needed mowing and the garden would have needed weeding after being left for 6 weeks without any care by the tenant, who was responsible for the maintenance of the gardens until the end of the tenancy on 6 February 2023. I find the amount claimed by the landlord for this is reasonable in the circumstances. Therefore, I award the landlord $80.00 for the lawn mowing and garden weeding claimed. The amount ordered is proved.

Is the tenant responsible for the cost of testing for methamphetamine?

The landlord claimed for the cost of methamphetamine testing at the end of the tenancy, providing an invoice for $230.00 for this testing.
Ms Overend said that, normally tenants are not charged for the cost of methamphetamine testing, unless there is a break lease situation in a fixed-term tenancy, when the tenants are then charged for methamphetamine testing. She stated also that the landlord routinely tests for methamphetamine before and after all their tenancies.
Further, the landlord provided a copy of a Methamphetamine Disclaimer signed by the owner of the property, indicating that they did not wish to have methamphetamine testing at the property and would assume responsibility for the consequences of this lack of testing. Despite this, the landlord wished to proceed with their claim for the cost of testing.
Ms Overend said that there was not any notice provided to the tenant about the landlord intending to test for methamphetamine, nor were the results provided to the tenant, as she said the tenant did not respond to their communications at that time.
Ms Overend said that property was tested for methamphetamine on 3 February 2023, which was prior to the termination of the tenancy on 6 February 2023. The landlord stated the testing results indicated the property was clear of methamphetamine. It was not alleged by the landlord that the tenant was in any way involved with methamphetamine either. In essence, there were no grounds provided by the landlord for believing a test for methamphetamine was required.
The tenant said she did not believe she should be responsible for the cost of methamphetamine testing by the landlord, especially when there were no grounds for the testing and the results were clear.
The landlord did not claim that the tenant had breached any of her tenant responsibilities pursuant to section 40 RTA, nor that the tenant had damaged the property in any way that would have necessitated a methamphetamine test. The landlord did not allege either that the tenant did not leave the interior of the property in anything other than a reasonably clean and tidy condition.
Section 48(2)(ba) RTA provides that the landlord must provide 48 hours’ notice to the tenant of their intention to enter the premises to test for the presence of contaminants or taking samples for such testing.
The landlord, by their own admission, did not provide any notice to the tenant of their intention to test for methamphetamine at the property.
There is nothing in the Tenancy Agreement that the landlord could point to, when asked, that would provide them with the authority to charge the tenant for the cost of routine methamphetamine testing.
Because of the above, I find the landlord has not proved that it is more likely than not that there is any basis for the landlord’s claim for the cost of methamphetamine testing. This claim is dismissed.
Because Inspire Property Management Limited As Agent For Olivia Ryder Family Trust has been mostly successful with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
The landlord did not apply for suppression. During the hearing, the tenant applied for suppression.
Section 95A(4) RTA provides that the Tribunal may, on the application of any party to proceedings or on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that all or part of the evidence given or the name or any identifying particulars of any witness or party not be published.
The tenant has three young children. She has acknowledged her obligations and said she is willing to pay what is owed, now that she understands her obligations under the fixed-term tenancy. I do not believe there is any public interest in her name being published in the circumstances, and so order that the tenant’s name and identifying details not be published.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4488308 — net $2,329.01 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$2,228.57	Rent arrears
Lawns and Garden work	$80.00	Lawns and Garden work
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,329.01
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,329.01

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details.
[The tenant/s] must pay Inspire Property Management Limited As Agent For Olivia Ryder Family Trust $2,329.01 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

Ms Overend attended the hearing by teleconference on behalf of the landlord. [The tenant/s], the tenant, also attended the hearing by teleconference.
The landlord initially applied for termination on the grounds of abandonment and for rent arrears. Whilst there was no formal claim for compensation originally, the landlord provided copies of invoices for lawn mowing and methamphetamine testing, in the application.
At the start of the hearing, the landlord withdrew their claim for termination, indicating that the tenant has left the property.
Any party bringing a claim before the Tenancy Tribunal has the burden of proving their claim on the balance of probabilities. They must prove it is more likely than not that their alleged version of events took place. Further, the evidence should be reasonable with no probable defects, such as inconsistency or improbability. The evidence should be consistent and supported by other acceptable evidence.

How much is owed for rent?

This is a fixed term tenancy that ended on 13 February 2023.
The tenant, [The tenant/s], said that she left the property fully on 26 December 2022, after giving two weeks’ notice to the landlord on 14 December 2022.
The tenant said that when she gave notice to the landlord on 14 December 2022, she did not understand that she had entered a fixed term tenancy but does now. She said she is prepared to pay the rent that is owed but would like to do that on a payment plan, as she has children to support. The tenant does not dispute the amount of rent arrears claimed by the landlord.
Section 50(1)(a) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”) provides that in the case of a fixed-term tenancy, the tenancy shall terminate on the expiry of the term of the tenancy, unless other exceptions apply. None of the specified exceptions in section 50(1)(a) RTA apply here.
The tenant did not apply to reduce the fixed term tenancy, either formally with the landlord or by application to the Tribunal. The notice provided by the tenant was inadequate, even for a periodic tenancy, though this tenancy is fixed-term. The tenant left the property on 26 December 2023, without providing adequate notice to the landlord.
Ms Overend said that the property was re-tenanted on 7 February 2023. Therefore, I find that the tenant is liable for rent to 6 February 2023, the day before the new tenancy began.
The landlord provided rent records proving that the amount owing in rent to 7 February 2023 is $2,285.71. As I find the tenant is liable for rent to 6 February 2023, I deduct one day’s rent from this amount. Weekly rent is $400.00 so daily rent is $57.14. Therefore, the tenant owes $2,228.57 in rent to 6 February 2023. Is the tenant responsible for the cost of garden maintenance at the end of the tenancy?
At the end of the tenancy the tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, remove all rubbish, return all keys and security devices, and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
In the Tenancy Agreement, the tenant was responsible for mowing the lawns and maintaining the garden. The landlord claimed $80.00 for the cost of a lawn mowing service to mow the lawns and weed the garden after the tenancy terminated in early February 2023, and provided an invoice in this amount.
The tenant said that she had mowed the lawns, weeded the garden and cleaned up the house, before moving out on 26 December 2023.
Whilst I accept that it is more likely than not that the tenant would have mowed the lawns and weeded the garden before she moved out on 26 December 2023, obviously the condition of the lawns and garden would have deteriorated between then and the end of the tenancy on 6 February 2023, without further attention from the tenant. In my view, despite the landlord not providing any photographic or exit report evidence of the condition of the garden at the end of the tenancy, it is more likely than not that the lawns would have needed mowing and the garden would have needed weeding after being left for 6 weeks without any care by the tenant, who was responsible for the maintenance of the gardens until the end of the tenancy on 6 February 2023. I find the amount claimed by the landlord for this is reasonable in the circumstances. Therefore, I award the landlord $80.00 for the lawn mowing and garden weeding claimed. The amount ordered is proved.

Is the tenant responsible for the cost of testing for methamphetamine?

The landlord claimed for the cost of methamphetamine testing at the end of the tenancy, providing an invoice for $230.00 for this testing.
Ms Overend said that, normally tenants are not charged for the cost of methamphetamine testing, unless there is a break lease situation in a fixed-term tenancy, when the tenants are then charged for methamphetamine testing. She stated also that the landlord routinely tests for methamphetamine before and after all their tenancies.
Further, the landlord provided a copy of a Methamphetamine Disclaimer signed by the owner of the property, indicating that they did not wish to have methamphetamine testing at the property and would assume responsibility for the consequences of this lack of testing. Despite this, the landlord wished to proceed with their claim for the cost of testing.
Ms Overend said that there was not any notice provided to the tenant about the landlord intending to test for methamphetamine, nor were the results provided to the tenant, as she said the tenant did not respond to their communications at that time.
Ms Overend said that property was tested for methamphetamine on 3 February 2023, which was prior to the termination of the tenancy on 6 February 2023. The landlord stated the testing results indicated the property was clear of methamphetamine. It was not alleged by the landlord that the tenant was in any way involved with methamphetamine either. In essence, there were no grounds provided by the landlord for believing a test for methamphetamine was required.
The tenant said she did not believe she should be responsible for the cost of methamphetamine testing by the landlord, especially when there were no grounds for the testing and the results were clear.
The landlord did not claim that the tenant had breached any of her tenant responsibilities pursuant to section 40 RTA, nor that the tenant had damaged the property in any way that would have necessitated a methamphetamine test. The landlord did not allege either that the tenant did not leave the interior of the property in anything other than a reasonably clean and tidy condition.
Section 48(2)(ba) RTA provides that the landlord must provide 48 hours’ notice to the tenant of their intention to enter the premises to test for the presence of contaminants or taking samples for such testing.
The landlord, by their own admission, did not provide any notice to the tenant of their intention to test for methamphetamine at the property.
There is nothing in the Tenancy Agreement that the landlord could point to, when asked, that would provide them with the authority to charge the tenant for the cost of routine methamphetamine testing.
Because of the above, I find the landlord has not proved that it is more likely than not that there is any basis for the landlord’s claim for the cost of methamphetamine testing. This claim is dismissed.
Because Inspire Property Management Limited As Agent For Olivia Ryder Family Trust has been mostly successful with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
The landlord did not apply for suppression. During the hearing, the tenant applied for suppression.
Section 95A(4) RTA provides that the Tribunal may, on the application of any party to proceedings or on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that all or part of the evidence given or the name or any identifying particulars of any witness or party not be published.
The tenant has three young children. She has acknowledged her obligations and said she is willing to pay what is owed, now that she understands her obligations under the fixed-term tenancy. I do not believe there is any public interest in her name being published in the circumstances, and so order that the tenant’s name and identifying details not be published.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4488308 — Rent arrears at 109 Waiau Crescent, Kingswell, Invercargill 9812

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4488308 — Rent arrears at 109 Waiau Crescent, Kingswell, Invercargill 9812

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Is the tenant responsible for the cost of testing for methamphetamine?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Is the tenant responsible for the cost of testing for methamphetamine?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions