What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4501622?

The tribunal order states: No suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.

How much money was awarded in case 4501622?

Cleaning: $350.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $755.11 awarded to landlord; Garage Cabinet: $335.00 awarded to landlord; Kitchen Cabinet: $215.00 awarded to landlord; Shower Glass Rail: $250.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $125.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4501622?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Rent arrears, Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4501622?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9463768-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4501622?

The tribunal order states: No suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.

How much money was awarded in case 4501622?

Cleaning: $350.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $755.11 awarded to landlord; Garage Cabinet: $335.00 awarded to landlord; Kitchen Cabinet: $215.00 awarded to landlord; Shower Glass Rail: $250.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $125.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4501622?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Rent arrears, Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4501622?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9463768-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

1 Graceville Lane, St Heliers, Auckland 1071 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4501622 — Property damage

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4501622 — net $2,030.11 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 06/01/2023	$755.11	Rent arrears to 06/01/2023
Cleaning	$350.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$125.00	Rubbish removal
Repairs: Kitchen cabinet	$215.00	Repairs: Kitchen cabinet
Repairs: Garage cabinet	$335.00	Repairs: Garage cabinet
Repairs: Shower glass rail	$250.00	Repairs: Shower glass rail
Net award	$2,030.11
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,030.11

No suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.

Xiaoyu Chen and Muyin Luo to pay In Step Trust $2,030.11 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,030.11 (6231947-005) to In Step Trust immediately. The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,549.89 (6231947- 005) to Xiaoyu Chen and Muyin Luo immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

The tenant made an application for refund of the bond following the end of the tenancy. 4501622, 45444492

The landlord made a cross-application for rent arrears, compensation and refund of the bond.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy began on 23 rd January 2019 and ended on 6 th January 2023.

Both parties provided rent records and after going through them thoroughly, I find that the rent owing at the end of the tenancy is $755.11.

I order the tenant to pay this amount to the landlord from the bond.

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

At the end of the tenancy the tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and remove all rubbish. See section 40(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).

The tenant did not leave the bathrooms reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish from the premises.

I award the landlord $350.00 for the bathroom cleaning. There was some calcium build up on the black bathroom vanity tops and taps that fell just short of being reasonably clean.

I also award the landlord $125.00 for rubbish removal which includes labour and tip fees.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

A landlord must prove that damage to the premises occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. If this is established, to avoid liability, the tenant must prove they did not carelessly or intentionally cause or permit the damage. Tenants are liable for the actions of people at the premises with their permission. See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA.

Where the damage is caused carelessly, and is covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to the lesser of the insurance excess or four weeks' rent. See section 49B(3)(a) RTA.

Where the damage is careless and is not covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to four weeks' rent. See section 49B(3)(b) RTA. Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. See section 49B(3A)(a) RTA.

Tenants are liable for the cost of repairing damage that is intentional or which results from any activity at the premises that is an imprisonable offence. This 4501622, 45444493 applies to anything the tenant does and anything done by a person they are responsible for. See section 49B(1) RTA.

Damage is intentional where a person intends to cause damage and takes the necessary steps to achieve that purpose. Damage is also intentional where a person does something, or allows a situation to continue, knowing that damage is a certainty. See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.

There was damage done to the kitchen cabinetry, garage cabinet and glass support rail in the bathroom shower. The tenant accepted that they had been caused carelessly.

I order the tenant to pay the landlord $215.00 for kitchen cabinet repair, $335.00 for garage cabinet repair and $250.00 for the shower glass support rail replacement. Claims not granted

The landlord had also sought compensation for replacing garage fluorescent lamps and 18 LED lights from a chandelier.

Although ordinarily the tenants are responsible for replacing standard lights, the tenants are not required to replace special lights.

Despite the tenancy agreement stating that it was the tenant’s responsibility to keep the light bulbs in working order for the premise, I find that garage fluorescent lamps and the chandelier are excluded from tenant’s responsibility under section 11 RTA.

This takes into account the usual lifespan of fluorescent lamp and LED lights.

I do not grant any compensation for the light replacement.

Also, I do not grant the landlord’s claim for garden care and rubbish removal.

The tenancy agreement stated that the tenant was to keep the premises, lawns and gardens in a reasonably clean and tidy condition free from rubbish and papers. The tenant was not to damage or remove any tree, shrub or bush from the property. The tenant was to keep the lawns mowed once per fortnight and the gardens weeded and in a generally tidy condition. The tenant was to be responsible for the removal of garden waste.

They were standard conditions as part of the tenancy agreement template and were not necessarily tailored for this premises as this premises had artificial grass. The tenant did maintain the gardens by watering the plants.

Without any prior discussion, the landlord engaged in the services of a gardener for garden maintenance. There was no evidence that the tenant was in breach of the tenant’s obligations to maintain the garden at that stage. 4501622, 45444494

Without discussions regarding payment, the landlord’s gardener continued to do the gardening.

As the landlord unilaterally engaged a gardener for the gardening when the tenant had not been in breach, the tenant cannot be faulted for thinking that the landlord had assumed responsibility for the gardening.

The tenant was never told to pay for the gardener and never invoiced for any gardening until after the tenancy.

I find that the landlord had assumed responsibility for the gardening when the gardener was engaged without prior discussions with the tenant.

Therefore, I do not grant any compensation for the gardening. Filing fee reimbursement

As neither party had substantially succeeded with their application, I do not order reimbursement of the filing fee either way.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4501622 — net $2,030.11 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 06/01/2023	$755.11	Rent arrears to 06/01/2023
Cleaning	$350.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$125.00	Rubbish removal
Repairs: Kitchen cabinet	$215.00	Repairs: Kitchen cabinet
Repairs: Garage cabinet	$335.00	Repairs: Garage cabinet
Repairs: Shower glass rail	$250.00	Repairs: Shower glass rail
Net award	$2,030.11
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,030.11

Order

No suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.
Xiaoyu Chen and Muyin Luo to pay In Step Trust $2,030.11 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,030.11 (6231947-005) to In Step Trust immediately. The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,549.89 (6231947- 005) to Xiaoyu Chen and Muyin Luo immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenant made an application for refund of the bond following the end of the tenancy. 4501622, 45444492
The landlord made a cross-application for rent arrears, compensation and refund of the bond.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy began on 23 rd January 2019 and ended on 6 th January 2023.
Both parties provided rent records and after going through them thoroughly, I find that the rent owing at the end of the tenancy is $755.11.
I order the tenant to pay this amount to the landlord from the bond.

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

At the end of the tenancy the tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and remove all rubbish. See section 40(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
The tenant did not leave the bathrooms reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish from the premises.
I award the landlord $350.00 for the bathroom cleaning. There was some calcium build up on the black bathroom vanity tops and taps that fell just short of being reasonably clean.
I also award the landlord $125.00 for rubbish removal which includes labour and tip fees.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

A landlord must prove that damage to the premises occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. If this is established, to avoid liability, the tenant must prove they did not carelessly or intentionally cause or permit the damage. Tenants are liable for the actions of people at the premises with their permission. See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA.
Where the damage is caused carelessly, and is covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to the lesser of the insurance excess or four weeks' rent. See section 49B(3)(a) RTA.
Where the damage is careless and is not covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to four weeks' rent. See section 49B(3)(b) RTA. Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. See section 49B(3A)(a) RTA.
Tenants are liable for the cost of repairing damage that is intentional or which results from any activity at the premises that is an imprisonable offence. This 4501622, 45444493 applies to anything the tenant does and anything done by a person they are responsible for. See section 49B(1) RTA.
Damage is intentional where a person intends to cause damage and takes the necessary steps to achieve that purpose. Damage is also intentional where a person does something, or allows a situation to continue, knowing that damage is a certainty. See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.
There was damage done to the kitchen cabinetry, garage cabinet and glass support rail in the bathroom shower. The tenant accepted that they had been caused carelessly.
I order the tenant to pay the landlord $215.00 for kitchen cabinet repair, $335.00 for garage cabinet repair and $250.00 for the shower glass support rail replacement. Claims not granted
The landlord had also sought compensation for replacing garage fluorescent lamps and 18 LED lights from a chandelier.
Although ordinarily the tenants are responsible for replacing standard lights, the tenants are not required to replace special lights.
Despite the tenancy agreement stating that it was the tenant’s responsibility to keep the light bulbs in working order for the premise, I find that garage fluorescent lamps and the chandelier are excluded from tenant’s responsibility under section 11 RTA.
This takes into account the usual lifespan of fluorescent lamp and LED lights.
I do not grant any compensation for the light replacement.
Also, I do not grant the landlord’s claim for garden care and rubbish removal.
The tenancy agreement stated that the tenant was to keep the premises, lawns and gardens in a reasonably clean and tidy condition free from rubbish and papers. The tenant was not to damage or remove any tree, shrub or bush from the property. The tenant was to keep the lawns mowed once per fortnight and the gardens weeded and in a generally tidy condition. The tenant was to be responsible for the removal of garden waste.
They were standard conditions as part of the tenancy agreement template and were not necessarily tailored for this premises as this premises had artificial grass. The tenant did maintain the gardens by watering the plants.
Without any prior discussion, the landlord engaged in the services of a gardener for garden maintenance. There was no evidence that the tenant was in breach of the tenant’s obligations to maintain the garden at that stage. 4501622, 45444494
Without discussions regarding payment, the landlord’s gardener continued to do the gardening.
As the landlord unilaterally engaged a gardener for the gardening when the tenant had not been in breach, the tenant cannot be faulted for thinking that the landlord had assumed responsibility for the gardening.
The tenant was never told to pay for the gardener and never invoiced for any gardening until after the tenancy.
I find that the landlord had assumed responsibility for the gardening when the gardener was engaged without prior discussions with the tenant.
Therefore, I do not grant any compensation for the gardening. Filing fee reimbursement
As neither party had substantially succeeded with their application, I do not order reimbursement of the filing fee either way.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4501622 — Property damage at 1 Graceville Lane, St Heliers, Auckland 1071

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4501622 — Property damage at 1 Graceville Lane, St Heliers, Auckland 1071

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions