What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4586993 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 4586993?

Cleaning: $366.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4586993?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4586993?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9199357-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4586993 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 4586993?

Cleaning: $366.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4586993?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4586993?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9199357-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

19 Rutherglen Avenue, Ilam, Christchurch 8041 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4586993 — Cleanliness

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4586993 — net $345.56 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Cleaning	$366.00		Cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement		$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Total award	$366.00	$20.44
Net award	$345.56
Bond	$2,760.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$345.56

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenants name and identifying details.
[The tenant/s] to pay Michael Smith and Emma Smith $345.56 from the bond, as calculated and shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,760.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: Michael Smith and Emma Smith: $345.56 [The tenant/s]: $2,414.44

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. [The tenant/s] for the tenants and Mr Smith for the landlord.
The tenants are seeking a refund of their bond and the filing fee. The tenants accept the landlords’ costs of $366.00 for cleaning, rubbish removal and gardening. However, the tenants are opposed to pay the landlord’s costs of $139.00 for a replacement vent and $3023.20 for the driveway to be professionally cleaned and resealed.
The tenancy commenced on 11 June 2022 and was a fixed term tenancy for 12 months. The tenancy ended on 29 April 2023 by consent of the parties.
At the end of the tenancy the parties conducted a final inspection. The landlord claimed that the driveway was unacceptable and covered in oil stains and that a plastic cover for a vent on the outside of the house was missing.
The landlord claims the driveway is about 5 to 10 years old and the house is built in the 1960’s.

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. See section 40(1)(e)(ii) -(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1) (ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs. - leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did remove all rubbish. - return the keys. - replace missing chattels, bulbs, and smoke alarm batteries.
After the termination of the tenancy the landlord sought that the tenants clean the driveway as it had oil stains on it. The tenants had cleaned the driveway numerous times and stated that the driveway was cleaned to a high standard.
At the hearing, the landlord advised that the tenants had been back to clean the driveway on a number of occasions and that from his point of view it was 80- 90% complete. However, he said he wants the driveway 100% cleaned.
There are new tenants at the property and there are now stains on the driveway from these tenants.
I do not find that the tenants have left the property unclean. Reasonable clean and tidy under the RTA does not mean perfect. The fact that the landlord stated himself that the driveway was cleaned 80-90% satisfies me that it was reasonable clean and tidy after the tenants went back to clean the driveway.

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.
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 landlord claims that the tenants caused damage during the tenancy by the missing vent and not telling him about it.
At the final inspection, the tenants and landlord noticed the missing plastic vent for the ducting from the kitchen range hood. The tenants say this was the first they knew of it. They suggested that the vent must have been blown off in bad weather. The landlord stated that the tenants must have been aware of the missing vent as it is on the wall by the back of the driveway and was probably damaged by a ball being kicked into it. The landlord says the damage occurred during the tenancy and was more than fair wear and tear, and the tenants are liability for the damage.
There is no evidence provided that convinces me that this was damage, and that the tenants caused the damage intentionally or carelessly.
I do not find that the tenants are liable for the missing plastic vent.
The tenants have been successful in their claim, and they are to receive their bond back minus the agreed sum of $366.00 for the cleaning and rubbish removal. I do not find them liable for the cost of the cleaning and resealing of the driveway and replacement of the vent.
Because [The tenant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4586993 — net $345.56 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Cleaning	$366.00		Cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement		$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Total award	$366.00	$20.44
Net award	$345.56
Bond	$2,760.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$345.56

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenants name and identifying details.
[The tenant/s] to pay Michael Smith and Emma Smith $345.56 from the bond, as calculated and shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,760.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: Michael Smith and Emma Smith: $345.56 [The tenant/s]: $2,414.44

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. [The tenant/s] for the tenants and Mr Smith for the landlord.
The tenants are seeking a refund of their bond and the filing fee. The tenants accept the landlords’ costs of $366.00 for cleaning, rubbish removal and gardening. However, the tenants are opposed to pay the landlord’s costs of $139.00 for a replacement vent and $3023.20 for the driveway to be professionally cleaned and resealed.
The tenancy commenced on 11 June 2022 and was a fixed term tenancy for 12 months. The tenancy ended on 29 April 2023 by consent of the parties.
At the end of the tenancy the parties conducted a final inspection. The landlord claimed that the driveway was unacceptable and covered in oil stains and that a plastic cover for a vent on the outside of the house was missing.
The landlord claims the driveway is about 5 to 10 years old and the house is built in the 1960’s.

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. See section 40(1)(e)(ii) -(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1) (ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs. - leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did remove all rubbish. - return the keys. - replace missing chattels, bulbs, and smoke alarm batteries.
After the termination of the tenancy the landlord sought that the tenants clean the driveway as it had oil stains on it. The tenants had cleaned the driveway numerous times and stated that the driveway was cleaned to a high standard.
At the hearing, the landlord advised that the tenants had been back to clean the driveway on a number of occasions and that from his point of view it was 80- 90% complete. However, he said he wants the driveway 100% cleaned.
There are new tenants at the property and there are now stains on the driveway from these tenants.
I do not find that the tenants have left the property unclean. Reasonable clean and tidy under the RTA does not mean perfect. The fact that the landlord stated himself that the driveway was cleaned 80-90% satisfies me that it was reasonable clean and tidy after the tenants went back to clean the driveway.

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.
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 landlord claims that the tenants caused damage during the tenancy by the missing vent and not telling him about it.
At the final inspection, the tenants and landlord noticed the missing plastic vent for the ducting from the kitchen range hood. The tenants say this was the first they knew of it. They suggested that the vent must have been blown off in bad weather. The landlord stated that the tenants must have been aware of the missing vent as it is on the wall by the back of the driveway and was probably damaged by a ball being kicked into it. The landlord says the damage occurred during the tenancy and was more than fair wear and tear, and the tenants are liability for the damage.
There is no evidence provided that convinces me that this was damage, and that the tenants caused the damage intentionally or carelessly.
I do not find that the tenants are liable for the missing plastic vent.
The tenants have been successful in their claim, and they are to receive their bond back minus the agreed sum of $366.00 for the cleaning and rubbish removal. I do not find them liable for the cost of the cleaning and resealing of the driveway and replacement of the vent.
Because [The tenant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4586993 — Cleanliness at 19 Rutherglen Avenue, Ilam, Christchurch 8041

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4586993 — Cleanliness at 19 Rutherglen Avenue, Ilam, Christchurch 8041

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Order

Reasons

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