How much money was awarded in case 4582169?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4582169?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4582169?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9334695-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 4582169?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4582169?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4582169?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9334695-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

14 Vesty Avenue, Hillcrest, Hamilton 3216 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4582169 — Cleanliness

Q: What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4582169?

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

Order

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

Bienne Orlanes, Liam O’Connor Pearce, Robbie Street and Tiziana Mei Hawkes must pay Monarch Realty Limited T/A Harcourts Property Management as Agent for Trevor Roberts $20.44 – being the filing fee - from the bond.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,939.53 (3034808-022) immediately apportioned as follows: Monarch Realty Limited T/A Harcourts Property Management as Agent for Trevor Roberts: $20.44 Bienne Orlanes, Liam O’Connor Pearce, Robbie Street and Tiziana Mei Hawkes: $1,919.09

The remaining claims were either settled at mediation or dismissed.

Reasons

Only the landlord attended the hearing. The tenant had sought an adjournment of the hearing, however, given the nature and quantum of the claim I declined the adjournment and gave the tenant the option of attending via teleconference. Two calls were placed to the number provided, with no response.

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

At mediation the majority of the landlord’s claims were settled. I do not intend to refer to them in this decision. The only matters remaining for determination relate to the invoices for lawn mowing, green waste disposal, weed spraying and the filing fee.

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.

Section 40 of the RTA requires a tenant to leave the premises “reasonably clean and tidy” at the end of the tenancy. The obligation is not to leave the premises in an immaculate state of cleanliness and tidiness, nor does it mean that it will necessarily be up to the standard that a landlord might consider for a new tenant.

The test is objective and not based on the subjective opinion of either the landlord or the tenant. In Housing New Zealand Ltd v Holloway Auckland TT 215/93, 8 February 1993 the Tribunal stated: ‘Reasonably tidy’ grounds are not perfect ‘prizewinning’ grounds, but neither [are they] grounds that suggest a property is unoccupied, or constitute a health hazard (vermin) or fire risk. Rather [it is] something in between; grounds maintained to a standard that an average, reasonable bystander would consider ‘reasonably tidy’.

The landlord submits that the tenant did not leave the exterior of the premises reasonably clean and tidy. Photographs taken by the mowing contractor before and after the mowing have been provided, together with the in-going inspection report and photographs. I have considered these carefully.

On balance, I consider the exterior of the premises, including the lawns, were left in a reasonable clean and tidy state. I agree that the premises was not immaculate, and I accept that the landlord wanted the lawns maintained to a higher standard for the next tenants but assessed objectively the premises was left in a reasonably tidy state.

Accordingly, the landlord’s application is dismissed. Filing Fee

Overall, Monarch Realty Limited T/A Harcourts Property Management as Agent for Trevor Roberts has substantially succeeded with the claim, so I have ordered reimbursement of the filing fee.

Order

No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.
Bienne Orlanes, Liam O’Connor Pearce, Robbie Street and Tiziana Mei Hawkes must pay Monarch Realty Limited T/A Harcourts Property Management as Agent for Trevor Roberts $20.44 – being the filing fee - from the bond.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,939.53 (3034808-022) immediately apportioned as follows: Monarch Realty Limited T/A Harcourts Property Management as Agent for Trevor Roberts: $20.44 Bienne Orlanes, Liam O’Connor Pearce, Robbie Street and Tiziana Mei Hawkes: $1,919.09
The remaining claims were either settled at mediation or dismissed.

Reasons

Only the landlord attended the hearing. The tenant had sought an adjournment of the hearing, however, given the nature and quantum of the claim I declined the adjournment and gave the tenant the option of attending via teleconference. Two calls were placed to the number provided, with no response.
The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
At mediation the majority of the landlord’s claims were settled. I do not intend to refer to them in this decision. The only matters remaining for determination relate to the invoices for lawn mowing, green waste disposal, weed spraying and the filing fee.

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.
Section 40 of the RTA requires a tenant to leave the premises “reasonably clean and tidy” at the end of the tenancy. The obligation is not to leave the premises in an immaculate state of cleanliness and tidiness, nor does it mean that it will necessarily be up to the standard that a landlord might consider for a new tenant.
The test is objective and not based on the subjective opinion of either the landlord or the tenant. In Housing New Zealand Ltd v Holloway Auckland TT 215/93, 8 February 1993 the Tribunal stated: ‘Reasonably tidy’ grounds are not perfect ‘prizewinning’ grounds, but neither [are they] grounds that suggest a property is unoccupied, or constitute a health hazard (vermin) or fire risk. Rather [it is] something in between; grounds maintained to a standard that an average, reasonable bystander would consider ‘reasonably tidy’.
The landlord submits that the tenant did not leave the exterior of the premises reasonably clean and tidy. Photographs taken by the mowing contractor before and after the mowing have been provided, together with the in-going inspection report and photographs. I have considered these carefully.
On balance, I consider the exterior of the premises, including the lawns, were left in a reasonable clean and tidy state. I agree that the premises was not immaculate, and I accept that the landlord wanted the lawns maintained to a higher standard for the next tenants but assessed objectively the premises was left in a reasonably tidy state.
Accordingly, the landlord’s application is dismissed. Filing Fee
Overall, Monarch Realty Limited T/A Harcourts Property Management as Agent for Trevor Roberts has substantially succeeded with the claim, so I have ordered reimbursement of the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4582169 — Cleanliness at 14 Vesty Avenue, Hillcrest, Hamilton 3216

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4582169 — Cleanliness at 14 Vesty Avenue, Hillcrest, Hamilton 3216

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions