What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4582277?

The tribunal order states: Kiri Wikaira must pay Mid North Real Estate Limited as agent for Craig Cooper

How much money was awarded in case 4582277?

Cleaning: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Cracked Glass Panel In Hallway: $558.90 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $13,000.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4582277?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4582277?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10335827-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4582277?

The tribunal order states: Kiri Wikaira must pay Mid North Real Estate Limited as agent for Craig Cooper

How much money was awarded in case 4582277?

Cleaning: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Cracked Glass Panel In Hallway: $558.90 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $13,000.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4582277?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4582277?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10335827-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

11b Windsor Road, Kaikohe, Far North 0405 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4582277 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

11b Windsor Road, Kaikohe, Far North 0405 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4582277 — Property damage | TenantCheck

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4582277 — net $14,058.90 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning	$500.00	Cleaning
Repairs: Cracked glass panel in hallway	$558.90	Repairs: Cracked glass panel in hallway
Repairs: Insurance excesses x 13 for repairs to holes in lounge, kitchen, hallway, toilet, and bedrooms	$13,000.00	Repairs: Insurance excesses x 13 for repairs to holes in lounge, kitchen, hallway, toilet, and bedrooms
Net award	$14,058.90
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$14,058.90

Claims and awards for application 4582277 — net $14,058.90 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Cleaning

Amount: $500.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning

Repairs: Cracked glass panel in hallway

Amount: $558.90
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Cracked glass panel in hallway

Repairs: Insurance excesses x 13 for repairs to holes in lounge, kitchen, hallway, toilet, and bedrooms

Amount: $13,000.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Insurance excesses x 13 for repairs to holes in lounge, kitchen, hallway, toilet, and bedrooms

Net award

Landlord $14,058.90

Total payable by Tenant to Landlord

Landlord $14,058.90

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Property damage

Order

Kiri Wikaira must pay Mid North Real Estate Limited as agent for Craig Cooper $14,058.90 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:

Reasons

Ms Van Engelen represented the landlord. The tenant did not attend the hearing.
The landlord has applied for cleaning costs and compensation for significant damage to the premises.
The landlord proved a claim for cleaning at a hearing on 9 November 2023. The Tribunal also awarded compensation for damage based on one insurance excess of $500.00.
The Tribunal granted the landlord a rehearing of the compensation claims because evidence became available after the hearing from the owner’s insurer that was not available at the earlier hearing.
I reheard that part of the application today.

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 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
The landlord gave evidence that the tenant allowed others to reside at the premises when she was not there. However, the landlord was unaware of that since the tenant always returned to the premises for inspections.
The Tribunal ended the tenancy by order dated 3 March 2023. By then, the persons residing at the premises with the tenant’s consent had caused significant damage to the interior of the premises.
The landlord (the owner) is insured for tenant damage. The landlord can claim for the repair of damage up to the amount of the excess charged by the insurer for each event.
Here, the landlord has charged 14 separate excesses because there are 14 identified areas of damage, each of which is dealt with as a separate claim.
The landlord’s insurer has charged an excess of $1,000.00 for each event.
I can award the landlord 13 of the excesses applied to the insurance claim. One claim (the cracked glass panel in the hallway) was not indemnified by the insurer because the repair cost is less than the $1,000.00 excess. I have awarded the repair cost for that claim.
But for the landlord’s insurance, the tenant’s liability might have been higher because it is probable that the damage was caused intentionally.
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 amounts ordered are proved by the landlord’s documentary evidence including photos produced at the previous hearing and the correspondence from the landlord’s insurer detailing the settlement of the insurance claim and the excesses that have been applied under the insurance policy.
Upon my enquiry, the landlord did not seek a name suppression order.

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4582277 — net $14,058.90 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning	$500.00	Cleaning
Repairs: Cracked glass panel in hallway	$558.90	Repairs: Cracked glass panel in hallway
Repairs: Insurance excesses x 13 for repairs to holes in lounge, kitchen, hallway, toilet, and bedrooms	$13,000.00	Repairs: Insurance excesses x 13 for repairs to holes in lounge, kitchen, hallway, toilet, and bedrooms
Net award	$14,058.90
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$14,058.90

Claims and awards for application 4582277 — net $14,058.90 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Cleaning

Amount: $500.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning

Repairs: Cracked glass panel in hallway

Amount: $558.90
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Cracked glass panel in hallway

Repairs: Insurance excesses x 13 for repairs to holes in lounge, kitchen, hallway, toilet, and bedrooms

Amount: $13,000.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Insurance excesses x 13 for repairs to holes in lounge, kitchen, hallway, toilet, and bedrooms

Net award

Landlord $14,058.90

Total payable by Tenant to Landlord

Landlord $14,058.90

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Property damage

Order

Kiri Wikaira must pay Mid North Real Estate Limited as agent for Craig Cooper $14,058.90 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:

Reasons

Ms Van Engelen represented the landlord. The tenant did not attend the hearing.
The landlord has applied for cleaning costs and compensation for significant damage to the premises.
The landlord proved a claim for cleaning at a hearing on 9 November 2023. The Tribunal also awarded compensation for damage based on one insurance excess of $500.00.
The Tribunal granted the landlord a rehearing of the compensation claims because evidence became available after the hearing from the owner’s insurer that was not available at the earlier hearing.
I reheard that part of the application today.

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 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
The landlord gave evidence that the tenant allowed others to reside at the premises when she was not there. However, the landlord was unaware of that since the tenant always returned to the premises for inspections.
The Tribunal ended the tenancy by order dated 3 March 2023. By then, the persons residing at the premises with the tenant’s consent had caused significant damage to the interior of the premises.
The landlord (the owner) is insured for tenant damage. The landlord can claim for the repair of damage up to the amount of the excess charged by the insurer for each event.
Here, the landlord has charged 14 separate excesses because there are 14 identified areas of damage, each of which is dealt with as a separate claim.
The landlord’s insurer has charged an excess of $1,000.00 for each event.
I can award the landlord 13 of the excesses applied to the insurance claim. One claim (the cracked glass panel in the hallway) was not indemnified by the insurer because the repair cost is less than the $1,000.00 excess. I have awarded the repair cost for that claim.
But for the landlord’s insurance, the tenant’s liability might have been higher because it is probable that the damage was caused intentionally.
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 amounts ordered are proved by the landlord’s documentary evidence including photos produced at the previous hearing and the correspondence from the landlord’s insurer detailing the settlement of the insurance claim and the excesses that have been applied under the insurance policy.
Upon my enquiry, the landlord did not seek a name suppression order.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4582277 — Property damage at 11b Windsor Road, Kaikohe, Far North 0405

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4582277 — Property damage at 11b Windsor Road, Kaikohe, Far North 0405

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions