What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4503190 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 4503190?

Cleaning: $300.99 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $528.32 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $281.46 awarded to landlord; Toilet Seat: $73.04 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: Curtains and bl…: $490.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Lampshades: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $270.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $14.78 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $164.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4503190?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4503190?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9372603-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4503190 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 4503190?

Cleaning: $300.99 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $528.32 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $281.46 awarded to landlord; Toilet Seat: $73.04 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: Curtains and bl…: $490.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Lampshades: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $270.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $14.78 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $164.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4503190?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4503190?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9372603-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4503190 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4503190 — Property damage | TenantCheck

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4503190 — net $123.03 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Replace furnishings: Curtains and blinds	$490.00	ility for the damage. Taking betterment into account, I order the tenant to pay $490.00.
Replace furnishings: Lampshades	$100.00	bility for the damage. Taking betterment into account I order the tenant to pay $100.00.
Window repairs	$528.32	d the landlord has provided two invoices as evidence. The cost of repairs being $528.32 and $281.46.
Window repairs	$281.46	Window repairs
Cleaning	$300.99	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$270.00	Rubbish removal
Rubbish removal: Truck Hire	$164.00	Rubbish removal: Truck Hire
Rubbish removal: Truck Diesel	$14.78	Rubbish removal: Truck Diesel
Repairs: Toilet seat	$73.04	the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The replacement cost is $73.04 and the tenant is ordered to pay that sum.
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$123.03
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$123.03

Claims and awards for application 4503190 — net $123.03 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Replace furnishings: Curtains and blinds

Amount: $490.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: ility for the damage. Taking betterment into account, I order the tenant to pay $490.00.

Replace furnishings: Lampshades

Amount: $100.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: bility for the damage. Taking betterment into account I order the tenant to pay $100.00.

Window repairs

Amount: $528.32
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: d the landlord has provided two invoices as evidence. The cost of repairs being $528.32 and $281.46.

Window repairs

Amount: $281.46
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Window repairs

Cleaning

Amount: $300.99
Awarded to: Landlord

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Filing Fee Property damage Rubbish Removal

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord name and identifying details.
Brown Denice and Kaiya-Mae Cherry Donovan must pay [The landlord/s] $123.03 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,120.00 [Bond number suppressed] to [The landlord/s] immediately.
The landlord may dispose of the remaining tenant belongings.
All other applications are dismissed.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The landlord was supported by an interpreter.
The tenant did not attend the hearing.
The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

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, 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.
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. The landlord provided invoices in support of the claim for cleaning ( $300.99) and carpet cleaning ($270.00).
The landlord provided invoices for the rubbish removal transfer fee ($271.53) truck hire ($164.00) and diesel ($14.78)
The landlord evidence showed that the premises were not left reasonably clean and tidy and the rubbish removal transfer fee confirms the amount of rubbish which needed to be removed.
The landlord claimed for costs incurred in cleaning paint from the windows. No evidence by way of invoice or photos were provided. The claim is dismissed for lack of evidence
The tenant did not return the keys or garage remote. No evidence was provided of the replacement costs. The claim is dismissed.
The amounts ordered are proved.

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 careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.
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 (or four weeks' market rent in the case of a tenant paying income-related rent). See section 49B(3)(a) RTA. The landlord is insured. The excess on each and every claim is $750.00.
Where the damage is careless and is not covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to four weeks' rent (or market 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 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.
The following damage was caused during the tenancy: Curtains had been removed and blinds damaged. The landlord provided invoices from Bunnings for replacement items at a total of $690.80. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. Taking betterment into account, I order the tenant to pay $490.00. Two lampshades were broken. The landlord accepted that the lampshades were old. The replacement cost is $300.00. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. Taking betterment into account I order the tenant to pay $100.00. The toilet seat was damaged. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The replacement cost is $73.04 and the tenant is ordered to pay that sum. Windows were broken and the landlord has provided two invoices as evidence. The cost of repairs being $528.32 and $281.46. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The tenant is ordered to pay $809.78. The landlord also sought costs for labour involved in some of the work. The landlord said that the labour was paid for in cash and that no invoice was available. I find that this claim has not been proven and that claim is dismissed.
The amounts ordered are proved.
I have taken into account betterment and depreciation. The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached their obligations, and should not be better or worse off. In calculating depreciation, I have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.
The landlord has applied to have some of the tenant goods disposed of. Having heard from the landlord it appears that the tenant had picked up a washing machine and a fridge at the end of the tenancy. The tenants said that the landlord could deal with anything else left behind as they wished. The landlord confirmed that the items were of no value and the Tribunal orders the landlord to dispose of those goods. No tenant personal documents remain
As [The landlord/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have ordered the tenant to reimburse the filing fee.
The landlord applied for name suppression. The landlord has been substantially successful in this matter and suppression of the landlord details is ordered.

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4503190 — net $123.03 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Replace furnishings: Curtains and blinds	$490.00	ility for the damage. Taking betterment into account, I order the tenant to pay $490.00.
Replace furnishings: Lampshades	$100.00	bility for the damage. Taking betterment into account I order the tenant to pay $100.00.
Window repairs	$528.32	d the landlord has provided two invoices as evidence. The cost of repairs being $528.32 and $281.46.
Window repairs	$281.46	Window repairs
Cleaning	$300.99	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$270.00	Rubbish removal
Rubbish removal: Truck Hire	$164.00	Rubbish removal: Truck Hire
Rubbish removal: Truck Diesel	$14.78	Rubbish removal: Truck Diesel
Repairs: Toilet seat	$73.04	the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The replacement cost is $73.04 and the tenant is ordered to pay that sum.
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$123.03
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$123.03

Claims and awards for application 4503190 — net $123.03 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Replace furnishings: Curtains and blinds

Amount: $490.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: ility for the damage. Taking betterment into account, I order the tenant to pay $490.00.

Replace furnishings: Lampshades

Amount: $100.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: bility for the damage. Taking betterment into account I order the tenant to pay $100.00.

Window repairs

Amount: $528.32
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: d the landlord has provided two invoices as evidence. The cost of repairs being $528.32 and $281.46.

Window repairs

Amount: $281.46
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Window repairs

Cleaning

Amount: $300.99
Awarded to: Landlord

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Filing Fee Property damage Rubbish Removal

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord name and identifying details.
Brown Denice and Kaiya-Mae Cherry Donovan must pay [The landlord/s] $123.03 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,120.00 [Bond number suppressed] to [The landlord/s] immediately.
The landlord may dispose of the remaining tenant belongings.
All other applications are dismissed.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The landlord was supported by an interpreter.
The tenant did not attend the hearing.
The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

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, 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.
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. The landlord provided invoices in support of the claim for cleaning ( $300.99) and carpet cleaning ($270.00).
The landlord provided invoices for the rubbish removal transfer fee ($271.53) truck hire ($164.00) and diesel ($14.78)
The landlord evidence showed that the premises were not left reasonably clean and tidy and the rubbish removal transfer fee confirms the amount of rubbish which needed to be removed.
The landlord claimed for costs incurred in cleaning paint from the windows. No evidence by way of invoice or photos were provided. The claim is dismissed for lack of evidence
The tenant did not return the keys or garage remote. No evidence was provided of the replacement costs. The claim is dismissed.
The amounts ordered are proved.

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 careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.
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 (or four weeks' market rent in the case of a tenant paying income-related rent). See section 49B(3)(a) RTA. The landlord is insured. The excess on each and every claim is $750.00.
Where the damage is careless and is not covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to four weeks' rent (or market 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 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.
The following damage was caused during the tenancy: Curtains had been removed and blinds damaged. The landlord provided invoices from Bunnings for replacement items at a total of $690.80. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. Taking betterment into account, I order the tenant to pay $490.00. Two lampshades were broken. The landlord accepted that the lampshades were old. The replacement cost is $300.00. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. Taking betterment into account I order the tenant to pay $100.00. The toilet seat was damaged. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The replacement cost is $73.04 and the tenant is ordered to pay that sum. Windows were broken and the landlord has provided two invoices as evidence. The cost of repairs being $528.32 and $281.46. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The tenant is ordered to pay $809.78. The landlord also sought costs for labour involved in some of the work. The landlord said that the labour was paid for in cash and that no invoice was available. I find that this claim has not been proven and that claim is dismissed.
The amounts ordered are proved.
I have taken into account betterment and depreciation. The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached their obligations, and should not be better or worse off. In calculating depreciation, I have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.
The landlord has applied to have some of the tenant goods disposed of. Having heard from the landlord it appears that the tenant had picked up a washing machine and a fridge at the end of the tenancy. The tenants said that the landlord could deal with anything else left behind as they wished. The landlord confirmed that the items were of no value and the Tribunal orders the landlord to dispose of those goods. No tenant personal documents remain
As [The landlord/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have ordered the tenant to reimburse the filing fee.
The landlord applied for name suppression. The landlord has been substantially successful in this matter and suppression of the landlord details is ordered.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4503190 — Property damage

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4503190 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Frequently asked questions