What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4559874 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 4559874?

Cleaning: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $170.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $375.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4559874?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4559874?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9172878-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4559874 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 4559874?

Cleaning: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $170.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $375.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4559874?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4559874?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9172878-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4559874 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4559874 — net $745.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning	$200.00	Cleaning
Repairs	$170.00	Repairs
Lock/key replacement	$375.00	Lock/key replacement
Net award	$745.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$745.00

The landlord attended this remote teleconference hearing.

An application for an adjournment was made by the tenant the day before the hearing. That application was dismissed. The tenant made a further application for an adjournment providing evidence that they had left New Zealand some days after notice of the hearing had been given, to travel to Australia. In her adjournment application, the tenant provided a telephone number for her husband who was in New Zealand as an alternative contact.

This was a teleconference hearing. Such hearings are commonly conducted with parties in Australia.

No sufficient grounds have been provided by the tenant for an adjournment.

I record that the flight evidence provided indicated that the tenant would not return to New Zealand until September 2023. The Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”) requires the Tribunal to deal with matters expeditiously.

The tenant had not attended the first hearing of this matter when it was part heard on 21 June 2023.

Telephone calls were made at the allocated hearing time to the phone number provided for the tenant. The call could not be connected. A telephone call was made to the phone number provided by the tenant for her husband. The call went directly to voicemail.

The Tribunal may hear matters in the absence of a party where satisfied that notice of the hearing has been given. I am so satisfied.

This matter was part heard on the sole issue of jurisdiction on 21 June 2023.The Tribunal held on that date that it did have jurisdiction to consider this claim

The landlord has applied for rent arrears and compensation following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 14 April 2023. The landlord provided a rent summary indicating that the tenant was in arrears in the sum of $850.00 on that date. The tenant had been paying $800.00 per week for the term of the tenancy. The landlord pointed to the tenancy agreement between the parties. That agreement provided for weekly rent of $800.00 per week at the commencement of the tenancy on 13 May 2022. The agreement further stated that rent was to increase to $850.00 per week on 13 August 2022.

Section 24(1)(d) RTA provides that rent must not be increased within 12 months after the date of the commencement of the tenancy. Any agreement that the parties may enter into which is contrary to that provision is of no effect.

The rent arrears claimed by the landlord have resulted from a rent increase. The rent increase has taken place within 12 months of the commencement of the tenancy. The claim is dismissed.

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. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Landlords are required to provide the premises to the tenant at the start of the tenancy in a reasonable state of cleanliness (see s 45(1)(a) RTA). Tenants must keep the premises reasonably clean and tidy during the tenancy, and they must return them in a reasonably clean and tidy state and remove their rubbish at the end of the tenancy (ss 40(1)(c) and (e)(iii) RTA).

In Ace Property Management v Owens (DC Wellington, CIV-2008-085-14441, 17 December 2008) the District Court said: A tenant’s obligation pursuant to the Act to leave a property in a “reasonably clean and reasonably tidy condition” does not mean that it will necessarily be up to a standard that a landlord may consider for a new tenant. It is a mistake for landlords to confuse those two matters” (the emphasis is mine).

The RTA does not require the premises to be provided or returned in a spotless or an immaculate condition. The standard is based on what an average bystander would consider reasonable; not on the subjective opinions of the landlord and tenant. There is no scientific way to determine what is reasonably clean and tidy, and the Tribunal must evaluate the evidence available, and in particular inspection reports and photographs.

The standard will vary according to the age and condition of the premises: the better the premises, the higher the standard. Surfaces that are new and in a good condition will be easier to clean than older and worn surfaces, particularly painted surfaces. Generally, tenants are not required to return premises any cleaner than they were at the start of the tenancy (Westwood v Western, DC Otahuhu, TT 2539/93 and 2540/93, 4 November 1994).

The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy. The landlord described the state of the premises and said that the cleaning was carried out to return the premises to a condition where they could be relet. That is not the standard required of the tenant. An invoice was provided for cleaning for $331.52. I consider that a reasonable invoice for cleaning required to bring the premises to the reasonably clean standard, based on the landlord evidence of the state of the property would be $200.00 and that is ordered.

The landlord says that the tenant did not return the keys. The landlord said that when they managed to contact the tenant after the end of the tenancy the tenant said that they had left the keys in a cupboard at the premises and that the landlord must have “hidden them”. I prefer the evidence of the landlord in this matter.

The landlord provided an invoice for lock and key replacement for $375.00. That amount is proven.

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. The landlord did not hold insurance for tenant damage.

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: • Damaged kitchen cabinet. • Damaged toilet roll holder. The landlord provided an invoice for the repair of both items of $170.00. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The amounts ordered are proved.

The landlord applied for name suppression. The landlord has been substantially successful and suppression of the landlord details is ordered.

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4559874 — net $745.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning	$200.00	Cleaning
Repairs	$170.00	Repairs
Lock/key replacement	$375.00	Lock/key replacement
Net award	$745.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$745.00

The landlord attended this remote teleconference hearing.

This was a teleconference hearing. Such hearings are commonly conducted with parties in Australia.

No sufficient grounds have been provided by the tenant for an adjournment.

The tenant had not attended the first hearing of this matter when it was part heard on 21 June 2023.

The Tribunal may hear matters in the absence of a party where satisfied that notice of the hearing has been given. I am so satisfied.

This matter was part heard on the sole issue of jurisdiction on 21 June 2023.The Tribunal held on that date that it did have jurisdiction to consider this claim

The landlord has applied for rent arrears and compensation following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The rent arrears claimed by the landlord have resulted from a rent increase. The rent increase has taken place within 12 months of the commencement of the tenancy. The claim is dismissed.

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. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

The landlord provided an invoice for lock and key replacement for $375.00. That amount is proven.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The amounts ordered are proved.

The landlord applied for name suppression. The landlord has been substantially successful and suppression of the landlord details is ordered.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4559874 — Property damage

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4559874 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

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

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

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

Frequently asked questions