How much money was awarded in case 4573076?

Compensation: (key bond not returned…: $100.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: (loss of amenities- di…: $500.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant; Rent Overpayment (From 21/03/23 To 1…: $615.83 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $200.00 awarded to landlord; (Hole In Bedroom Door: $172.50 awarded to landlord; Tenancy: $500.00 awarded to tenant; Working At All And Not Replaced When…: $200.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4573076?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4573076?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9728476-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 4573076?

Compensation: (key bond not returned…: $100.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: (loss of amenities- di…: $500.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant; Rent Overpayment (From 21/03/23 To 1…: $615.83 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $200.00 awarded to landlord; (Hole In Bedroom Door: $172.50 awarded to landlord; Tenancy: $500.00 awarded to tenant; Working At All And Not Replaced When…: $200.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4573076?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4573076?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9728476-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4573076 — Property damage

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4573076 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4573076 — net $793.77 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Repairs: (damage to back of lounge suite	$200.00		Repairs: (damage to back of lounge suite
Repairs: (hole in bedroom door	$172.50		Repairs: (hole in bedroom door
Rent overpayment (from 21/03/23 to 13/10/23		$615.83	Rent overpayment (from 21/03/23 to 13/10/23
Filing fee reimbursement		$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Compensation: (key bond not returned at the end of the		$100.00	(key bond not returned at the end of the
tenancy		$500.00	tenancy
Compensation: (loss of amenities- dishwasher not		$500.00	(loss of amenities- dishwasher not
working at all and not replaced when it became so worn it		$200.00	working at all and not replaced when it became so worn it
Total award	$372.50	$1,936.27
Net award		$793.77
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant		$793.77

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $770.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to the tenant immediately.

Unihouse Albany Ltd must pay the tenant 793.77 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

The parties had attended mediation and had agreed to the terms of a mediator’s order on 28 June 2023. Consequently, $1,470.00 of the $2,250.00 bond was repaid to the tenant, leaving a balance of $770.00 with the bond centre to award to the parties after the parties’ additional claims against each other were settled by the Tribunal.

A number of issues remained between the parties that I have heard today. They are set out below. Damages sought by landlord

The tenancy ended on 13 October 2022.The key bond of $100 had not been returned to the tenant even though she had returned the key on the last day of her tenancy.

The tenant also sought a refund of the remaining $770.00 bond from the $2,250.00 bond that was lodged with the bond centre on 11 August 2023 as she had left the house in a reasonably clean and tidy state and did not consider she had carelessly or intentionally caused any damage to the property.

The landlord had refused to refund these bond amounts to her as it had some counterclaims against her for compensation damage it stated she had done to the premises and the sofa and that she had failed to leave the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy state at the end of the tenancy.

I considered the evidence put to me by both parties and concluded that the tenant had proven that she had left the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy state at the end of the day on 13 October 2023 and that the photographic evidence the landlord provided was taken in the morning of possession day, prior to the tenant having undertaken a full and extensive clean of the premises.

The landlord’s evidence did show some cat scratches to the back corner of the couch, and the tenant took responsibility for the costs associated with fixing a hole in the bedroom door. Compensation was awarded to the landlord for this damage. The landlord failed to prove that the tenant had caused damage to the remainder of the property, more than fair wear and tear, and/or that he had incurred the costs of repairing such damage. Therefore, he failed to prove the remainder of his damages claims/ Overpayment of rent

The tenant made claims for reimbursement of an overpayment of rent of $615.83. She had set up an automatic payment to repay the landlord for damages that resulted from her trying to instal a washing machine without authorisation. The premises had communal clothes washing facilities and no washing machine was permitted to be installed in the premises she rented.

The tenant paid a total of $1,160.00 between 21 March 2023 and 13 October 2023. The agreed debt was $544.17. This debt was made up of charges of $474.38 for Fire and Emergency NZ being called out when the alarm went off in January 2021 and the plumbing costs of $310.49 to repair the leak and damage done to the premises.

The tenant has proven her claim for overpayment of rent of $615.83 and that amount is to be reimbursed to her by the landlord. Landlord’s failure to repair/maintain the premises

Section 45(1)(b) provides that a landlord shall “provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair having regard to the age and character of the premises and the period during which the premises are likely to remain habitable and available for residential purposes”. The tenant claimed the landlord had failed to meet its s45(1)(b) obligation.

The tenant sought compensation for the landlord’s failure to repair and maintain the dishwasher. It repeatedly broke down throughout her tenancy. Eventually it was incapable of any further repair, but it was not replaced, leaving the tenant without a dishwasher for some months at the end stages of her tenancy. I find that the tenant suffered the loss of amenity of the dishwasher because of the landlord’s breach of s 45(1)(b) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) and have awarded her a rent reduction of $500.00 for that loss.

The tenant also sought compensation for failure to undertake effective pest control for a significant cockroach infestation. This resulted in the tenant having to deal with cockroaches running across the walls and ceilings and infesting her personal property so that she had to have it fumigated before it could be transferred to her new rental accommodation. I find that the tenant suffered the loss of quiet enjoyment of the premises for the duration of the tenancy because of the landlord’s breach of s 45(1)(b) of the RTA and have awarded her a rent reduction of $200.00 for that loss.

The tenant also sought compensation for the landlord’s failure to dry out the lounge and dining areas after a major leak in the roof caused flooding of these areas of the premises. The landlord confirmed that it had not got commercial dryers to dry out the flooring and walls and simply left the premises to dry out and told the tenants to use the heat pump to try and dry the rooms out. The rooms were not inhabitable for 4 weeks. The tenant had to pay for her parents to stay in other accommodation, as the lounge they were going to sleep in was not habitable for their entire stay. I find that the tenant suffered the loss of amenity of the lounge and dining room during this period because of the landlord’s breach of s45(1)(b) of the RTA and have awarded her a rent reduction of $500.00 for that loss. Filing fee

Because the applicant has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4573076 — net $793.77 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Repairs: (damage to back of lounge suite	$200.00		Repairs: (damage to back of lounge suite
Repairs: (hole in bedroom door	$172.50		Repairs: (hole in bedroom door
Rent overpayment (from 21/03/23 to 13/10/23		$615.83	Rent overpayment (from 21/03/23 to 13/10/23
Filing fee reimbursement		$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Compensation: (key bond not returned at the end of the		$100.00	(key bond not returned at the end of the
tenancy		$500.00	tenancy
Compensation: (loss of amenities- dishwasher not		$500.00	(loss of amenities- dishwasher not
working at all and not replaced when it became so worn it		$200.00	working at all and not replaced when it became so worn it
Total award	$372.50	$1,936.27
Net award		$793.77
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant		$793.77

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $770.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to the tenant immediately.
Unihouse Albany Ltd must pay the tenant 793.77 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The parties had attended mediation and had agreed to the terms of a mediator’s order on 28 June 2023. Consequently, $1,470.00 of the $2,250.00 bond was repaid to the tenant, leaving a balance of $770.00 with the bond centre to award to the parties after the parties’ additional claims against each other were settled by the Tribunal.
A number of issues remained between the parties that I have heard today. They are set out below. Damages sought by landlord
The tenancy ended on 13 October 2022.The key bond of $100 had not been returned to the tenant even though she had returned the key on the last day of her tenancy.
The tenant also sought a refund of the remaining $770.00 bond from the $2,250.00 bond that was lodged with the bond centre on 11 August 2023 as she had left the house in a reasonably clean and tidy state and did not consider she had carelessly or intentionally caused any damage to the property.
The landlord had refused to refund these bond amounts to her as it had some counterclaims against her for compensation damage it stated she had done to the premises and the sofa and that she had failed to leave the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy state at the end of the tenancy.
I considered the evidence put to me by both parties and concluded that the tenant had proven that she had left the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy state at the end of the day on 13 October 2023 and that the photographic evidence the landlord provided was taken in the morning of possession day, prior to the tenant having undertaken a full and extensive clean of the premises.
The landlord’s evidence did show some cat scratches to the back corner of the couch, and the tenant took responsibility for the costs associated with fixing a hole in the bedroom door. Compensation was awarded to the landlord for this damage. The landlord failed to prove that the tenant had caused damage to the remainder of the property, more than fair wear and tear, and/or that he had incurred the costs of repairing such damage. Therefore, he failed to prove the remainder of his damages claims/ Overpayment of rent
The tenant made claims for reimbursement of an overpayment of rent of $615.83. She had set up an automatic payment to repay the landlord for damages that resulted from her trying to instal a washing machine without authorisation. The premises had communal clothes washing facilities and no washing machine was permitted to be installed in the premises she rented.
The tenant paid a total of $1,160.00 between 21 March 2023 and 13 October 2023. The agreed debt was $544.17. This debt was made up of charges of $474.38 for Fire and Emergency NZ being called out when the alarm went off in January 2021 and the plumbing costs of $310.49 to repair the leak and damage done to the premises.
The tenant has proven her claim for overpayment of rent of $615.83 and that amount is to be reimbursed to her by the landlord. Landlord’s failure to repair/maintain the premises
Section 45(1)(b) provides that a landlord shall “provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair having regard to the age and character of the premises and the period during which the premises are likely to remain habitable and available for residential purposes”. The tenant claimed the landlord had failed to meet its s45(1)(b) obligation.
The tenant sought compensation for the landlord’s failure to repair and maintain the dishwasher. It repeatedly broke down throughout her tenancy. Eventually it was incapable of any further repair, but it was not replaced, leaving the tenant without a dishwasher for some months at the end stages of her tenancy. I find that the tenant suffered the loss of amenity of the dishwasher because of the landlord’s breach of s 45(1)(b) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) and have awarded her a rent reduction of $500.00 for that loss.
The tenant also sought compensation for failure to undertake effective pest control for a significant cockroach infestation. This resulted in the tenant having to deal with cockroaches running across the walls and ceilings and infesting her personal property so that she had to have it fumigated before it could be transferred to her new rental accommodation. I find that the tenant suffered the loss of quiet enjoyment of the premises for the duration of the tenancy because of the landlord’s breach of s 45(1)(b) of the RTA and have awarded her a rent reduction of $200.00 for that loss.
The tenant also sought compensation for the landlord’s failure to dry out the lounge and dining areas after a major leak in the roof caused flooding of these areas of the premises. The landlord confirmed that it had not got commercial dryers to dry out the flooring and walls and simply left the premises to dry out and told the tenants to use the heat pump to try and dry the rooms out. The rooms were not inhabitable for 4 weeks. The tenant had to pay for her parents to stay in other accommodation, as the lounge they were going to sleep in was not habitable for their entire stay. I find that the tenant suffered the loss of amenity of the lounge and dining room during this period because of the landlord’s breach of s45(1)(b) of the RTA and have awarded her a rent reduction of $500.00 for that loss. Filing fee
Because the applicant has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4573076 — Property damage

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4573076 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions