How much money was awarded in case 4575130?

Painting: $260.54 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $40.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $41.05 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4575130?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4575130?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9532264-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 4575130?

Painting: $260.54 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $40.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $41.05 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4575130?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4575130?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9532264-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

33 Mason Heights, Warkworth, Warkworth 0910 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4575130 — Property damage

Q: What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4575130?

The tribunal order states: No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4575130 — net $341.59 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Water rates	$41.05	Water rates
Painting	$260.54	Painting
Repairs	$40.00	Repairs
Net award	$341.59
Bond	$2,700.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$341.59

No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.

Tanya Connell to pay Philippa Anne King As The Trustee For The Philippa King Family Trust $341.59 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,700.00 (6446076-007) immediately apportioned as follows: Philippa Anne King As The Trustee For The Philippa King Family Trust: $341.59 Tanya Connell: $2,358.41

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The tenant attended the hearing by telephone.

The tenant applied for release of the bond following the end of the tenancy.

The landlord applied for water rates, paint repairs, cleaning and general repairs.

How much is owed for water rates?

The landlord provided a water rates invoices dated 12 April 2023. A special meter reading had taken place on 11 April 2023.

The tenant was not able to provide evidence that she paid this invoice. I have deducted the fixed charge of $15.91 and taken account of the credit from the previous month. The amount owed is $41.50 and this amount is ordered. Cleaning

The landlord has claimed for cleaning costs.

The tenant employed a professional cleaner at the end of the tenancy and the cleaner’s invoice details the work carried out.

The landlord produced close photographs showing areas which she considered required further cleaning. At the hearing she stated that it was not clean enough for a new tenant to move in.

Section 40(1)(ii) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that the tenant shall on the termination of the tenancy leave the premises in a reasonably clean and reasonably tidy condition.

The tenant produced photographs which show that the premises were reasonably clean and tidy. There may have been the odd area where some cleaning was required before a new tenant moved in but that is not the test.

I am satisfied that the premises was reasonably clean and tidy and therefore the landlord’s claim for cleaning costs is dismissed. Painting

The landlord claims for painting to the premises at the end of the tenancy. The invoice from the painter details the work undertaken as being to repair the impact damage to the walls in the hall, bathroom, and lounge and to touch up the walls in the three bedrooms and to repaint walls in garage and kitchen.

The tenant referred to an email from the landlord dated 3 April 2023 where she agreed to pay for the repainting of the hallway and bathroom. At the hearing the landlord advised that it was when the house was empty that she saw more painting was required and therefore she has claimed for compensation.

The photographs produced by the landlord show scuff marks and some dents. The tenant claims that the damage is fair wear and tear (see section 49A(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986).

I do not agree that the tenant should be responsible for the painting where the landlord had agreed to meet the cost or for the painting of the scuff marks. I have awarded two hours of painting rather than the 5 hours claimed. I have included the cost of the paint. The amount awarded for painting is $260.54. Repairs

The landlord has claimed repairs for the curtain track (which was bent), three doorstops which were damaged and the drawer vanity runner.

While the tenant says that she employed someone to carry out repairs to the curtains the photographs show that the curtain rail was bent and therefore required repairing. The doorstops also required repairing and the tenant agreed to this.

In relation to the drawer vanity runner, I am not convinced by the evidence that the tenant should be responsible for this damage. The tenant had advised the landlord by email on 18 October 2022 that the drawer runner was not working. The tenant taped the drawer shut so that it would not be used.

The landlord considered that this would be an easy fix, as did the contractor employed to repair it on 11 April 2023 1 . However, it seems that the actual issue with the drawer was not discovered until after the tenancy ended.

Given the delay in properly addressing this issue it is not clear that the tenant is responsible for damage that she brought to the landlord’s attention six months earlier.

I have awarded $40.00 for repairs to the curtain track and door stops.

As both parties have had some success with their claims I make no award for reimbursement of the filing fee. 1 Affidavit of Clinton Floyd Smith sworn 23 May 2023, paragraph 6

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4575130 — net $341.59 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Water rates	$41.05	Water rates
Painting	$260.54	Painting
Repairs	$40.00	Repairs
Net award	$341.59
Bond	$2,700.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$341.59

Order

No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.
Tanya Connell to pay Philippa Anne King As The Trustee For The Philippa King Family Trust $341.59 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,700.00 (6446076-007) immediately apportioned as follows: Philippa Anne King As The Trustee For The Philippa King Family Trust: $341.59 Tanya Connell: $2,358.41

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The tenant attended the hearing by telephone.
The tenant applied for release of the bond following the end of the tenancy.
The landlord applied for water rates, paint repairs, cleaning and general repairs.

How much is owed for water rates?

The landlord provided a water rates invoices dated 12 April 2023. A special meter reading had taken place on 11 April 2023.
The tenant was not able to provide evidence that she paid this invoice. I have deducted the fixed charge of $15.91 and taken account of the credit from the previous month. The amount owed is $41.50 and this amount is ordered. Cleaning
The landlord has claimed for cleaning costs.
The tenant employed a professional cleaner at the end of the tenancy and the cleaner’s invoice details the work carried out.
The landlord produced close photographs showing areas which she considered required further cleaning. At the hearing she stated that it was not clean enough for a new tenant to move in.
Section 40(1)(ii) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that the tenant shall on the termination of the tenancy leave the premises in a reasonably clean and reasonably tidy condition.
The tenant produced photographs which show that the premises were reasonably clean and tidy. There may have been the odd area where some cleaning was required before a new tenant moved in but that is not the test.
I am satisfied that the premises was reasonably clean and tidy and therefore the landlord’s claim for cleaning costs is dismissed. Painting
The landlord claims for painting to the premises at the end of the tenancy. The invoice from the painter details the work undertaken as being to repair the impact damage to the walls in the hall, bathroom, and lounge and to touch up the walls in the three bedrooms and to repaint walls in garage and kitchen.
The tenant referred to an email from the landlord dated 3 April 2023 where she agreed to pay for the repainting of the hallway and bathroom. At the hearing the landlord advised that it was when the house was empty that she saw more painting was required and therefore she has claimed for compensation.
The photographs produced by the landlord show scuff marks and some dents. The tenant claims that the damage is fair wear and tear (see section 49A(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986).
I do not agree that the tenant should be responsible for the painting where the landlord had agreed to meet the cost or for the painting of the scuff marks. I have awarded two hours of painting rather than the 5 hours claimed. I have included the cost of the paint. The amount awarded for painting is $260.54. Repairs
The landlord has claimed repairs for the curtain track (which was bent), three doorstops which were damaged and the drawer vanity runner.
While the tenant says that she employed someone to carry out repairs to the curtains the photographs show that the curtain rail was bent and therefore required repairing. The doorstops also required repairing and the tenant agreed to this.
In relation to the drawer vanity runner, I am not convinced by the evidence that the tenant should be responsible for this damage. The tenant had advised the landlord by email on 18 October 2022 that the drawer runner was not working. The tenant taped the drawer shut so that it would not be used.
The landlord considered that this would be an easy fix, as did the contractor employed to repair it on 11 April 2023 1 . However, it seems that the actual issue with the drawer was not discovered until after the tenancy ended.
Given the delay in properly addressing this issue it is not clear that the tenant is responsible for damage that she brought to the landlord’s attention six months earlier.
I have awarded $40.00 for repairs to the curtain track and door stops.
As both parties have had some success with their claims I make no award for reimbursement of the filing fee. 1 Affidavit of Clinton Floyd Smith sworn 23 May 2023, paragraph 6

Tenancy Tribunal case 4575130 — Property damage at 33 Mason Heights, Warkworth, Warkworth 0910

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4575130 — Property damage at 33 Mason Heights, Warkworth, Warkworth 0910

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for water rates?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for water rates?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions