What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4509671 about?

The tribunal order states: Islam Elzeiny must pay [The landlord/s] $19,878.80 immediately, calculated as

How much money was awarded in case 4509671?

Cleaning: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Electricity: $282.31 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $2,499.99 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Removal And Storage: $421.25 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $12,700.00 awarded to landlord; Broken Thermostat: $247.36 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $617.72 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $4,225.10 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: Curtain/fixture…: $300.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Dryer: $139.99 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $224.64 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4509671?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4509671?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9637443-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4509671 about?

The tribunal order states: Islam Elzeiny must pay [The landlord/s] $19,878.80 immediately, calculated as

How much money was awarded in case 4509671?

Cleaning: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Electricity: $282.31 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $2,499.99 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Removal And Storage: $421.25 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $12,700.00 awarded to landlord; Broken Thermostat: $247.36 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $617.72 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $4,225.10 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: Curtain/fixture…: $300.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Dryer: $139.99 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $224.64 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4509671?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4509671?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9637443-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4509671 — Rent arrears

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4509671 — net $19,878.80 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$12,700.00	Rent arrears
Cleaning	$1,000.00	Cleaning
Repairs: Cooktop replacement and installation	$617.72	Repairs: Cooktop replacement and installation
Replace furnishings: Dryer	$139.99	Replace furnishings: Dryer
Replace furnishings: Curtain/fixtures	$300.00	Replace furnishings: Curtain/fixtures
Repairs: Broken thermostat	$247.36	Repairs: Broken thermostat
External window repairs: body corporate excess	$2,499.99	External window repairs: body corporate excess
Removal and storage	$421.25	Removal and storage
Repairs: Walls: repair and repainting	$4,225.10	Repairs: Walls: repair and repainting
Water rates	$224.64	Water rates
Electricity	$282.31	Electricity
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$19,878.80
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$19,878.80

The landlord attended via teleconference (pre-approved). There was no appearance by the tenant.

The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent and outgoings?

The tenancy ended on 2 March 2023 via an expedited abandonment application. A new tenancy did not commence until 1 June 2023 and the tenant remained liable for rent until 31 May 2023 (a new tenancy commenced 1 June 2023). The landlord provided rent records that showed the last payment made was in early February 2023 and significant rent arrears already existed at that time. The final rent arrears is determined at $12,700.00.

The landlord sought electricity and water compensation. Invoices which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy were provided but both include fixed charges that should not be charged to the tenant. As advised at the hearing, the final amounts owing would be revised to reflect variable consumption only. The totals owing then are $224.64 for water and $282.31 for electricity. These are ordered.

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 photos and invoices that supported the cleaning cost of $1,000, removal of content and rubbish of $421.25

The tenant did not return the keys.

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 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.

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: a. Cooktop replacement and installation b. Dryer c. Curtain/fixtures d. Broken thermostat e. Window repairs: External: body corporate excess f. Repairs: Walls: repair and repainting Cooktop replacement and installation

The glass cooktop was smashed in one corner and required replacement. The landlord provided a photo of the damage and invoices for the replacement. The replacement cost was mitigated through the use of a cheaper cooktop. Dryer

The door of the dryer was broken and it could not be used. A replacement dryer was purchased by the landlord. Curtain/fixtures

One curtain in the second bedroom had been pulled down in part and the curtain and fittings required repair or replacement. An invoice to evidence the cost was supported evidentially by a photo. Broken thermostat

The dial on the thermostat was broken off, rendering the air conditioning unusable. An invoice and photo support the claim. Window repairs: External: body corporate excess

The external windows were cracked by the tenant, or others there with his permission. Being a high level in an apartment block made for an expensive repair. The body corporate excess of $2,499.99 was charged. This compares to the actual cost of over $6,000 for the repair and this is awarded in full. Repairs: Walls: repair and repainting

During the tenancy there were a series of events that caused damage to the walls. The tenant accepted liability and had committed to a repayment plan that was not adhered to. An invoice was provided and this is accepted as the cost of repair.

The damage above is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The amounts ordered are proved.

I have considered possible 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. The landlord has tactically replaced items to minimise cost, this in effect negates any betterment considerations and the full amounts for these replacement items is awarded. Application filing fee

Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

I make no other orders for any other costs. Suppression

Section 95A RTA states regarding suppression orders that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.

The landlord requested suppression. As they have been substantially successful in these proceedings, this is ordered. Insurance

The landlord has some unresolved claims with his insurer. He intends to revisit them after this order. If they enjoy any subsequent success, it should be factored into any subsequent enforcement of the debt established in this order. They may also want to review s 49C Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4509671 — net $19,878.80 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$12,700.00	Rent arrears
Cleaning	$1,000.00	Cleaning
Repairs: Cooktop replacement and installation	$617.72	Repairs: Cooktop replacement and installation
Replace furnishings: Dryer	$139.99	Replace furnishings: Dryer
Replace furnishings: Curtain/fixtures	$300.00	Replace furnishings: Curtain/fixtures
Repairs: Broken thermostat	$247.36	Repairs: Broken thermostat
External window repairs: body corporate excess	$2,499.99	External window repairs: body corporate excess
Removal and storage	$421.25	Removal and storage
Repairs: Walls: repair and repainting	$4,225.10	Repairs: Walls: repair and repainting
Water rates	$224.64	Water rates
Electricity	$282.31	Electricity
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$19,878.80
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$19,878.80

Order

Islam Elzeiny must pay [The landlord/s] $19,878.80 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,800.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended via teleconference (pre-approved). There was no appearance by the tenant.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent and outgoings?

The tenancy ended on 2 March 2023 via an expedited abandonment application. A new tenancy did not commence until 1 June 2023 and the tenant remained liable for rent until 31 May 2023 (a new tenancy commenced 1 June 2023). The landlord provided rent records that showed the last payment made was in early February 2023 and significant rent arrears already existed at that time. The final rent arrears is determined at $12,700.00.
The landlord sought electricity and water compensation. Invoices which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy were provided but both include fixed charges that should not be charged to the tenant. As advised at the hearing, the final amounts owing would be revised to reflect variable consumption only. The totals owing then are $224.64 for water and $282.31 for electricity. These are ordered.

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 photos and invoices that supported the cleaning cost of $1,000, removal of content and rubbish of $421.25
The tenant did not return the keys.
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 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.
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: a. Cooktop replacement and installation b. Dryer c. Curtain/fixtures d. Broken thermostat e. Window repairs: External: body corporate excess f. Repairs: Walls: repair and repainting Cooktop replacement and installation
The glass cooktop was smashed in one corner and required replacement. The landlord provided a photo of the damage and invoices for the replacement. The replacement cost was mitigated through the use of a cheaper cooktop. Dryer
The door of the dryer was broken and it could not be used. A replacement dryer was purchased by the landlord. Curtain/fixtures
One curtain in the second bedroom had been pulled down in part and the curtain and fittings required repair or replacement. An invoice to evidence the cost was supported evidentially by a photo. Broken thermostat
The dial on the thermostat was broken off, rendering the air conditioning unusable. An invoice and photo support the claim. Window repairs: External: body corporate excess
The external windows were cracked by the tenant, or others there with his permission. Being a high level in an apartment block made for an expensive repair. The body corporate excess of $2,499.99 was charged. This compares to the actual cost of over $6,000 for the repair and this is awarded in full. Repairs: Walls: repair and repainting
During the tenancy there were a series of events that caused damage to the walls. The tenant accepted liability and had committed to a repayment plan that was not adhered to. An invoice was provided and this is accepted as the cost of repair.
The damage above is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved.
I have considered possible 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. The landlord has tactically replaced items to minimise cost, this in effect negates any betterment considerations and the full amounts for these replacement items is awarded. Application filing fee
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.
I make no other orders for any other costs. Suppression
Section 95A RTA states regarding suppression orders that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
The landlord requested suppression. As they have been substantially successful in these proceedings, this is ordered. Insurance
The landlord has some unresolved claims with his insurer. He intends to revisit them after this order. If they enjoy any subsequent success, it should be factored into any subsequent enforcement of the debt established in this order. They may also want to review s 49C Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4509671 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4509671 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent and outgoings?

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

How much is owed for rent and outgoings?

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