What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4617515 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenants’ names and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 4617515?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4617515?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4617515?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9521062-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4617515 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenants’ names and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 4617515?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4617515?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4617515?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9521062-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

87 Georges Drive, Napier South, Napier 4110 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4617515 — Cleanliness

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing which was held by teleconference.

This was a tenancy which began on 9 February 2022 and ended on 16 April 2023. There were no issues during the tenancy with the way the property was kept by the tenants.

The tenants had wanted to be at the final inspection but run a business and were unable to get away at the time specified.

The property manager undertook the inspection. She reported “Overall house has been returned great. Small issues: the cobwebs throughout corners and ceilings of house, as well as behind the curtains and between windows and screen doors - screen doors also a bit dusty.”

The tenants returned to the property to remove some green waste that had also been noted but felt that they had left the interior of the premises in more than reasonable condition.

Having not heard from the tenant by the next day the property manager arranged for a cleaner to clear away the cobwebs and the landlord seeks compensation for the $195.50 paid to the cleaner.

There is a disagreement between the parties as to whether adequate opportunity was given to the tenants to attend the final inspection and address any shortcomings in how the property was left. Fundamentally however, the Tribunal is required to decide whether the landlord has proved a breach by the tenants of their obligation to leave the premises in a reasonably clean and reasonably tidy condition (s.40(1)(e)(iii)).

The property manager points to the stipulation in the pre-final inspection guide given to tenants that “Windows to be cleaned (both inside and out.) Flyscreens to be brushed........Cobwebs to be removed.”

Those guides cannot however create a greater obligation on the tenants than the Act provides for.

Assessing whether premises are left “reasonable” is of course a subjective exercise.

Photographs provided by the landlord show that there were some areas with cobwebs present. However, taking into account the minor extent of those imperfections in the tenants’ cleaning of the premises and the landlord’s acknowledgement that in all other respect the premises were handed over in “great” condition, I do not find it proved that the tenants breached their obligation to return the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy condition.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing which was held by teleconference.

This was a tenancy which began on 9 February 2022 and ended on 16 April 2023. There were no issues during the tenancy with the way the property was kept by the tenants.

The tenants had wanted to be at the final inspection but run a business and were unable to get away at the time specified.

The tenants returned to the property to remove some green waste that had also been noted but felt that they had left the interior of the premises in more than reasonable condition.

Having not heard from the tenant by the next day the property manager arranged for a cleaner to clear away the cobwebs and the landlord seeks compensation for the $195.50 paid to the cleaner.

Those guides cannot however create a greater obligation on the tenants than the Act provides for.

Assessing whether premises are left “reasonable” is of course a subjective exercise.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4617515 — Cleanliness at 87 Georges Drive, Napier South, Napier 4110

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4617515 — Cleanliness at 87 Georges Drive, Napier South, Napier 4110

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Key findings

Frequently asked questions