What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4610696?

The tribunal order states: No application suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.

How much money was awarded in case 4610696?

Cleaning: $245.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4610696?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4610696?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9229186-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4610696?

The tribunal order states: No application suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.

How much money was awarded in case 4610696?

Cleaning: $245.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4610696?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4610696?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9229186-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 22W, 166 Gloucester Street, Christchurch Central, Tenancy Tribunal Case 4610696 — Cleanliness

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4610696 — net $245.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning	$245.00	Cleaning
Net award	$245.00
Bond	$3,600.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$245.00

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4610696 — net $245.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning	$245.00	Cleaning
Net award	$245.00
Bond	$3,600.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$245.00

Order

No application suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.
Thomas Victor Henry Ronald Cattermole to pay Whittle Knight & Boatwood Estate Agents Limited As Agent For Deorum Holdings Ltd $245.00 from the bond, calculated as shown in the table below.
By consent of the parties, the tenant is to send the landlord a written request (by email) for copies of gas and electricity meter readings for the premises during the term of the tenancy and the request must specify the period or periods for which the readings are sought. The landlord will provide the information within 7 days of the written request.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,600.00 (5963834-003) immediately apportioned as follows: Whittle Knight & Boatwood Estate Agents Limited As Agent For Deorum Holdings Ltd: $245.00 Thomas Victor Henry Ronald Cattermole: $3,355.00

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing by teleconference with the landlord represented by Ms Heyward.
The landlord has applied for compensation for cleaning, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. The tenant has filed a cross application seeking full refund of the bond and an order that the landlord provide evidence of meter readings for electricity and gas for which he has been invoiced and paid.
The tenancy ended on 24 April 2023.

Did the tenant comply with their cleaning 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 (RTA).
The tenant's obligation to leave the premises reasonably clean and reasonably tidy is not an absolute standard. It does not mean that the premises will necessarily be ready for occupation by a new tenant straight away. It is to be expected that a landlord will spend some time (or pay someone else) on cleaning and maintenance work between tenancies. This is part of the business of being a landlord. The test as to whether premises are in a reasonably clean and tidy condition is an objective test, not to be determined on the basis of the subjective opinion of either the landlord or the tenant.
The Landlord claims that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy after the tenancy ended as evidenced by photos produced in evidence at the hearing. They arranged for their own cleaner to remedy the issues at a cost of $301.31 and seek reimbursement from the tenant.
The tenant disputes the claim for cleaning and his arguments may be summarised as follows: a. The premises were left reasonably clean and tidy based on the photos; b. The tenant had vacated the property well prior to the end date, although other occupiers were still at the property until 15 April 2023. Between 15 and 24 April he arranged for his cleaner to clean the apartment 2-3 times. He did not have an invoice for the work and says he paid her cash for the work. During that time, Ms Heyward visited the property several times to show it to prospective tenants, including on the day the tenancy ended, and she had plenty of opportunity to observe the state of the property and advise the tenant of any outstanding issues he needed to address. He argues that she should have advised him of the outstanding cleaning required so that he could rectify it and failure to do so was unreasonable. He considers he should have been given an opportunity to return to the premises and complete any cleaning required. On that basis, he says he should not be responsible for the landlord’s cleaning costs; c. He asked for a joint inspection and the landlord’s failure to do a joint inspection so that any cleaning issues could be addressed is unfair and is also a basis for rejecting the landlord’s claim for costs; d. The landlord’s cleaning invoice is beyond the scope of the cleaning issues raised by the landlord and evidenced by their photos.
The landlord’s response to the tenant’s arguments is summarised as follows: a. The photos show that the premises were not reasonably clean and tidy; b. Prior to the tenancy ending, Ms Heyward sent a standard form cleaning list to the tenant on 27 March 2023 and followed up prior to the tenancy ending to ensure cleaning was under control. The tenant had indicated to her that the premises had been cleaned as per the cleaning list and left reasonably clean and tidy; c. While Ms Heyward attended the premises for viewings before the tenancy ended, this was not for the purpose of completing an end of tenancy inspection and such an inspection cannot be completed until the tenants have vacated and the tenancy ended; d. The tenant did not specifically ask for a joint inspection before the tenancy ended and Ms Heyward advised him on at least 2 occasions (by emails on 14 and 20 April) that she would complete a final inspection after the tenancy ended, confirming that it would take place on Tuesday 25 April; e. A landlord is not required to give the tenant another opportunity to clean or remedy any issues after the tenancy has ended; f. The cleaning invoice covers all outstanding cleaning after the tenancy ended.
After carefully considering all the available evidence and the oral evidence and submission of each party I make the following findings: a. I am satisfied on the evidence that there was no agreement between the parties that a joint inspection would be carried out before the tenancy ended and the tenant knew that the landlord intended to inspect after the tenancy ended and the keys were returned. The tenant was also advised clearly what needed to be done in terms of cleaning before the tenancy ended and indicated that this would all be done. If he required feedback from the landlord so that anything could be rectified, he needed to communicate that clearly to the landlord and arrange a joint inspection. b. The landlord is not required to give the tenant an opportunity to return to the premises to rectify any issues found by the landlord after the tenancy has ended. c. I find on the evidence that the premises were not reasonably clean and tidy at the end of the tenancy and some further cleaning was required. However, some of the cleaning in the invoice is not supported by photo evidence. For example, there are no photos showing that the insides of kitchen cupboard and drawers and laundry cupboards were not reasonably clean. Therefore, I have reduced the amount sought to take this factor into account.
The amount ordered of $245 is proved. Invoices for electricity and gas
The tenant complained that the landlord never supplied copies of the gas and electricity meter readings taken during the tenancy, for which invoices were rendered and paid by the tenant. The parties have agreed that the tenant will clarify and request in writing which readings he requires copies of. The landlord will then supply that information within 7 days of the tenant’s written request.
As both parties have had some degree of success regarding their claims, neither party is awarded reimbursement of the filing fee paid on their applications.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4610696 — Cleanliness at Unit/Flat 22W, 166 Gloucester Street, Christchurch Central,

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4610696 — Cleanliness at Unit/Flat 22W, 166 Gloucester Street, Christchurch Central,

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions