What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4555131 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 4555131?

Cleaning: $667.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $850.00 awarded to landlord; Downstairs Door: $344.00 awarded to landlord; Phone Jack: $141.86 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $270.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4555131?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4555131?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9400003-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4555131 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 4555131?

Cleaning: $667.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $850.00 awarded to landlord; Downstairs Door: $344.00 awarded to landlord; Phone Jack: $141.86 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $270.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4555131?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4555131?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9400003-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

16B Oriana Crescent, Bellevue, Tauranga 3110 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4555131 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4555131 — net $2,272.86 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Repairs: phone jack	$141.86	Repairs: phone jack
Repairs: downstairs door	$344.00	Repairs: downstairs door
Cleaning	$667.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$270.00	Rubbish removal
Carpet replacement excess	$850.00	Carpet replacement excess
Net award	$2,272.86
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,272.86

The landlord attended the hearing by telephone. The tenant Mr Hemmings appeared in person. Ms Stewart did not attend.

The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

The tenancy began on 8 May 2022 and ended on 2 December 2022 when the tenants were evicted for a breach of a mediated order for rent arrears.

The landlord has received the bond and used it against the outstanding rent

The tenant believed that they had until January to find a new property and was surprised to be evicted by the landlord.

The premises are a 3-bedroom home that was recently renovated with a new bathroom, kitchen and carpet just before the start of this tenancy.

The tenant claimed that they left the premises how they found it and this included a damaged door and stained carpet.

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 claimed for a substantial amount for cleaning, rubbish removal and carpet cleaning. The invoice did not include an hourly rate or how long each of the areas took to clean.

The landlord provided four photographs of the interior with the application. Some time was allowed to her to forward another 12 during the hearing.

Most of the photographs were of the carpet, a few of a kitchen bench a cupboard and a shower. An oven clean was claimed but there was no evidence to support this.

Due to the lack of an itemised invoice and lack of evidence I have awarded $550.00 for cleaning and carpet cleaning.

The tenant said that they had started to clear up the rubbish at the section and put it into an orange flexi bin. The landlord provided a photo of this and said it was unable to be picked up and the rubbish was removed and put into black bags by the cleanings along with anything left at the premises.

The photos of the black bags filled half a garage. Apart from the orange flexi bin there was little evidence that a lot of rubbish was left at the premises. It is acknowledged that the rubbish included 2 washing machines’ and on this basis I award $350.00 for rubbish removal.

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.

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 downstairs door was broken with large holes in it and a phone jack/ ethernet cable on the bench was melted and damaged. The carpet in the lounge was stained beyond cleaning and replaced by insurance.

The tenant said that these were in this condition when they moved in. They did not request the landlord to attend to this maintenance because they were in rent arrears and believed they had no grounds to complain

The landlord provided pre tenancy inspection photos of an undamaged door and phone jack.

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

The amount awarded for the door is less than claimed as the new door is of a higher quality than the original one.

The photograph of the damaged carpet shows heavy staining and soiling. The landlord said it smelled like dog and the tenant confirmed that they had a dog that came inside on occasions.

The insurance company agreed to cove the replacement of the carpet. The landlord claimed reimbursement of the excess. A quote from [The carpet company] for the replacement was provided.

I find that the tenant is liable for the damage to the carpet. It was in good condition at the start of the tenancy. Having pets inside add to the wear of the carpet and I find that the damage is beyond fair wear and tear.

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 claim for curtain damages is dismissed due to lack of evidence.

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

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4555131 — net $2,272.86 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Repairs: phone jack	$141.86	Repairs: phone jack
Repairs: downstairs door	$344.00	Repairs: downstairs door
Cleaning	$667.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$270.00	Rubbish removal
Carpet replacement excess	$850.00	Carpet replacement excess
Net award	$2,272.86
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,272.86