What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4602589?

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

How much money was awarded in case 4602589?

Cleaning: $345.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $650.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $229.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $473.80 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $6,410.72 awarded to landlord; Walls: $650.00 awarded to landlord; Smoke Alarms: $101.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $890.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4602589?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage, Cleanliness, Smoke alarms.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4602589?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9462881-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4602589?

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

How much money was awarded in case 4602589?

Cleaning: $345.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $650.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $229.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $473.80 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $6,410.72 awarded to landlord; Walls: $650.00 awarded to landlord; Smoke Alarms: $101.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $890.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4602589?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage, Cleanliness, Smoke alarms.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4602589?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9462881-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

14 Dinwiddie Avenue, Onekawa, Napier 4110 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4602589 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

14 Dinwiddie Avenue, Onekawa, Napier 4110 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4602589 — Rent arrears | 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 4602589 — net $7,749.52 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 15/08/23	$6,410.72	Rent arrears to 15/08/23
Repairs: Walls	$650.00	Repairs: Walls
Replace furnishings: Smoke alarms and light bulbs	$101.00	Replace furnishings: Smoke alarms and light bulbs
Carpet Cleaning	$345.00	Carpet Cleaning
Lock/key replacement	$229.00	Lock/key replacement
Cleaning and garden works – during tenancy 04/05/23	$650.00	Cleaning and garden works – during tenancy 04/05/23
Window repairs – during tenancy 09/03/23	$473.80	Window repairs – during tenancy 09/03/23
Cleaning and rubbish removal – end of tenancy 26/08/23	$890.00	Cleaning and rubbish removal – end of tenancy 26/08/23
Net award	$7,749.52
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$7,749.52

Claims and awards for application 4602589 — net $7,749.52 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears to 15/08/23

Amount: $6,410.72
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears to 15/08/23

Repairs: Walls

Amount: $650.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Walls

Replace furnishings: Smoke alarms and light bulbs

Amount: $101.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Replace furnishings: Smoke alarms and light bulbs

Carpet Cleaning

Amount: $345.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Carpet Cleaning

Lock/key replacement

Amount: $229.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lock/key replacement

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Carpet Cleaning Lawns And Garden Work Property damage Rent arrears Replace Smoke Alarms Rubbish Removal

Order

No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.
Ashlee Rangipuehu Spooner-Gotty must pay Rent-A-Home Limited as agent for Tammy Onekawa, Jonathan Heaphy and Steve Mundy as trustees of the Fidelis Trust $7,749.52 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,000.00 (3594409-009) to Rent-A- Home Limited as agent for Tammy Onekawa, Jonathan Heaphy and Steve Mundy as trustees of the Fidelis Trust immediately.

Reasons

Only the landlord, represented by Charles and Barbara Rangihuna, appeared at the hearing.
The tenant did not appear at the hearing, and has not given reasons for her absence, or applied for an adjournment.
There are two applications. As the tenant did not appear, their application is dismissed.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation and refund of the bond, following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 15 August 2023 when the tenant vacated the premises. The tenant was meant to vacate the premises earlier but had refused to do so.
The landlord provided evidence of text messages between the property manager and the tenant confirming the tenants vacate date and rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.

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 leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA). The tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries and replace standard light bulbs.
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, did not remove all rubbish and did not replace missing smoke alarms and light bulbs. The tenant did not return all of the keys.
The landlord provided photographs and invoices supporting their claims. The state of the property was appalling.
The amounts ordered are proved.

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 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 following damage was caused during the tenancy: holes in the walls, significant marks and drawings on the walls and broken windows. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord provided entry and exit inspection photographs and invoices supporting their claims. The amounts ordered are proved.
The landlord sought the cost of repairs to scuff marks on a bedroom wall during the tenancy. This element of the landlord’s claim is dismissed on the basis that it has not been proven that the damage was more than fair wear and tear which is a landlord responsibility.
The landlord introduced new claims on the day of the hearing for damage to a screen door but as this was not raised by the landlord in their application or in any subsequent submissions by the landlord, I have declined to hear the new claim. The landlord is welcome to file a new application for those claims. Filing fee
The landlord confirmed during the hearing that they did not seek reimbursement of the filing fee and so no order has been made for the same. Suppression
The landlord confirmed during the hearing that they did not seek a suppression order. T Lee-Lewis 27 September 2023

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 4602589 — net $7,749.52 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 15/08/23	$6,410.72	Rent arrears to 15/08/23
Repairs: Walls	$650.00	Repairs: Walls
Replace furnishings: Smoke alarms and light bulbs	$101.00	Replace furnishings: Smoke alarms and light bulbs
Carpet Cleaning	$345.00	Carpet Cleaning
Lock/key replacement	$229.00	Lock/key replacement
Cleaning and garden works – during tenancy 04/05/23	$650.00	Cleaning and garden works – during tenancy 04/05/23
Window repairs – during tenancy 09/03/23	$473.80	Window repairs – during tenancy 09/03/23
Cleaning and rubbish removal – end of tenancy 26/08/23	$890.00	Cleaning and rubbish removal – end of tenancy 26/08/23
Net award	$7,749.52
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$7,749.52

Claims and awards for application 4602589 — net $7,749.52 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears to 15/08/23

Amount: $6,410.72
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears to 15/08/23

Repairs: Walls

Amount: $650.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Walls

Replace furnishings: Smoke alarms and light bulbs

Amount: $101.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Replace furnishings: Smoke alarms and light bulbs

Carpet Cleaning

Amount: $345.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Carpet Cleaning

Lock/key replacement

Amount: $229.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lock/key replacement

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Carpet Cleaning Lawns And Garden Work Property damage Rent arrears Replace Smoke Alarms Rubbish Removal

Order

No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.
Ashlee Rangipuehu Spooner-Gotty must pay Rent-A-Home Limited as agent for Tammy Onekawa, Jonathan Heaphy and Steve Mundy as trustees of the Fidelis Trust $7,749.52 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,000.00 (3594409-009) to Rent-A- Home Limited as agent for Tammy Onekawa, Jonathan Heaphy and Steve Mundy as trustees of the Fidelis Trust immediately.

Reasons

Only the landlord, represented by Charles and Barbara Rangihuna, appeared at the hearing.
The tenant did not appear at the hearing, and has not given reasons for her absence, or applied for an adjournment.
There are two applications. As the tenant did not appear, their application is dismissed.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation and refund of the bond, following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 15 August 2023 when the tenant vacated the premises. The tenant was meant to vacate the premises earlier but had refused to do so.
The landlord provided evidence of text messages between the property manager and the tenant confirming the tenants vacate date and rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.

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 leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA). The tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries and replace standard light bulbs.
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, did not remove all rubbish and did not replace missing smoke alarms and light bulbs. The tenant did not return all of the keys.
The landlord provided photographs and invoices supporting their claims. The state of the property was appalling.
The amounts ordered are proved.

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 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 following damage was caused during the tenancy: holes in the walls, significant marks and drawings on the walls and broken windows. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord provided entry and exit inspection photographs and invoices supporting their claims. The amounts ordered are proved.
The landlord sought the cost of repairs to scuff marks on a bedroom wall during the tenancy. This element of the landlord’s claim is dismissed on the basis that it has not been proven that the damage was more than fair wear and tear which is a landlord responsibility.
The landlord introduced new claims on the day of the hearing for damage to a screen door but as this was not raised by the landlord in their application or in any subsequent submissions by the landlord, I have declined to hear the new claim. The landlord is welcome to file a new application for those claims. Filing fee
The landlord confirmed during the hearing that they did not seek reimbursement of the filing fee and so no order has been made for the same. Suppression
The landlord confirmed during the hearing that they did not seek a suppression order. T Lee-Lewis 27 September 2023

Tenancy Tribunal case 4602589 — Rent arrears at 14 Dinwiddie Avenue, Onekawa, Napier 4110

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4602589 — Rent arrears at 14 Dinwiddie Avenue, Onekawa, Napier 4110

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions