What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4618432?

The tribunal order states: Karen Pongi and Siosiua Pongi must pay Deepshikha Narayan $2,295.18

How much money was awarded in case 4618432?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $301.88 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $202.86 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $4,130.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4618432?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4618432?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9728312-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4618432?

The tribunal order states: Karen Pongi and Siosiua Pongi must pay Deepshikha Narayan $2,295.18

How much money was awarded in case 4618432?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $301.88 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $202.86 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $4,130.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4618432?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4618432?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9728312-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 6, 14 Albert Street, Otahuhu, Auckland 1062 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4618432 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4618432 — net $2,295.18 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 13 February 2023	$4,130.00	Rent arrears to 13 February 2023
Lock/key replacement	$202.86	Lock/key replacement
Lawns and Garden work	$301.88	Lawns and Garden work
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,295.18
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,295.18

Order

Karen Pongi and Siosiua Pongi must pay Deepshikha Narayan $2,295.18 immediately, being rent arrears to 13 February 2023.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,360.00 (5183195-011) to Deepshikha Narayan immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing by teleconference.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
This was a fixed term tenancy that started on 5 September 2022 and was due to end on 5 September 2025. The parties signed the Tenancy Agreement on 1 August 2022. On 23 November 2022, the Tenant notified the Landlord she wanted to end the tenancy early.
The parties came to an agreement that the Tenant could break the tenancy agreement early however the conditions regarding the early termination were disputed. A new tenancy started on 14 February 2023. The Tenant paid for the costs of advertising the property.

How much is owed for rent arrears?

There was disagreement between the parties regarding the end date of the tenancy. The Landlord claimed for rent arrears to the 13 February 2023 and provided a rent summary to prove this. The Tenants last rent payment was on 26 December 2022. The Landlord submitted when the Tenant notified the Landlord they intended to vacate early, the Landlord agreed to release them subject to a new Tenant being found and the Tenant paying for rent up to when this occurred. The Landlord provided copies of text messages between the parties which showed the Landlord clearly conveyed these requirements. The Tenant read and understood the requirement to pay rent until a new Tenant was found because they responded that they could not cover rent for this property and a new property.
The Tenant claimed that they had given notice to vacate on 31 December 2022 and they paid the advertising fee for the property. They did not owe any rent arrears beyond the 31 December 2023. They had dealt with a different Property Manager, namely Michelle Frew after they had notified the Landlord of the early termination. Ms Frew was not present at the hearing. The Tenant advised she understood all she had to pay was advertising costs and then nothing further was required after she vacated. The Tenant referred to email correspondence between herself and Ms Frew which confirmed the Landlord agreed to the cessation of rent liability after 31 December 2022. In perusing the email correspondence however, there was nothing confirming the Landlord consented to the Tenant being released early from the fixed term without having to pay any further rent. After not hearing from the Landlord after a few weeks when she moved out, the Tenant construed the Landlords actions and communication as meaning she was no longer liable for rent until she received an email for outstanding rent arrears.
The Landlord submitted Miss Frew never told the Tenant she could be released from the tenancy without paying any further rent. The email correspondence referred to by the Tenant only confirmed the Landlord would install a new lock box but not that their liability would end when they vacated. The law
The usual legal position with a fixed-term contract is that the term of the contract will be applied strictly, and it is only in limited circumstances that a court or tribunal will interfere with it. For residential tenancies, one of those circumstances is found in s 66 Residential Tenancies Act 1986, which allows for the reduction of fixed term tenancy agreements. The Tenant did not apply for this in this instance.
In considering the evidence, I find it more likely than not that the Landlord ended the fixed term tenancy on 13 February 2023 and the rent records support the amount of arrears claimed. This was a fixed term for three years which is a considerably long condition that was unlikely to be overlooked. The Tenant was aware of this condition when they signed the agreement because they had a whole month to consider it before the tenancy started. To then expect to end the tenancy very early and claim they were not aware or told by the Landlord of the ongoing rent liability is irrelevant. This is an obligation of the Tenant which they agreed to when they signed up to the tenancy. The Tenants supporting evidence also did not actually prove the Landlord agreed to cease the Tenants liability for rent arrears once they vacated.
I find that it is more likely than not, that the date of termination was 13 February 2023 and award the amount claimed for rent arrears.
The amounts ordered are proved.

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.
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. The Landlord submitted there were stacks of rubbish they had to remove and dog faeces everywhere. The grass was nearly knee height so they had to mow the lawns. The recycling bin was full of items such as a mop that should not have been in there so the Landlord had to sort the rubbish out. An invoice was provided for the rubbish removal and lawn mowing.
The Tenant refuted this stating when they moved into the property, they had to clear up a lot of the rubbish because the property was not clean and tidy. They estimated the rubbish they left when they moved out would have taken an hour to remove so the amount the Landlord was requesting was excessive. They also had professional cleaners attend the property so it is unlikely they would have left a mess as the Landlord had claimed.
In considering the evidence, I find it more likely than not that the Tenant did not leave the lawns clean and tidy or remove the rubbish from the invoice provided by the Landlord. The Tenant also did not provide evidence that a professional cleaner had attended to the rubbish at the property.
The amounts ordered are proved.
The Tenant did not return the keys so the Landlord claimed costs for a lock smith to rekey two doors. An invoice was provided from a locksmith.
The Tenant disputed the locksmiths costs stating they left the keys with their own cleaner they had organised. This was the first time they had heard of the keys not being returned to the Landlord.
In considering the evidence, the Tenant admitted they did not return the keys to the Landlord but gave it to their own cleaner they had hired. The Landlord did not receive this from the cleaner however the onus is on the Tenant to return the keys or ensure whoever they left it with returned it to the Landlord.
The amounts ordered are proved.
As Deepshikha Narayan has wholly succeeded with the claim the Tenant must reimburse the filing fee.
As neither party has sought name suppression, this has not been ordered.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4618432 — net $2,295.18 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 13 February 2023	$4,130.00	Rent arrears to 13 February 2023
Lock/key replacement	$202.86	Lock/key replacement
Lawns and Garden work	$301.88	Lawns and Garden work
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,295.18
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,295.18

Order

Karen Pongi and Siosiua Pongi must pay Deepshikha Narayan $2,295.18 immediately, being rent arrears to 13 February 2023.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,360.00 (5183195-011) to Deepshikha Narayan immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing by teleconference.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
This was a fixed term tenancy that started on 5 September 2022 and was due to end on 5 September 2025. The parties signed the Tenancy Agreement on 1 August 2022. On 23 November 2022, the Tenant notified the Landlord she wanted to end the tenancy early.
The parties came to an agreement that the Tenant could break the tenancy agreement early however the conditions regarding the early termination were disputed. A new tenancy started on 14 February 2023. The Tenant paid for the costs of advertising the property.

How much is owed for rent arrears?

There was disagreement between the parties regarding the end date of the tenancy. The Landlord claimed for rent arrears to the 13 February 2023 and provided a rent summary to prove this. The Tenants last rent payment was on 26 December 2022. The Landlord submitted when the Tenant notified the Landlord they intended to vacate early, the Landlord agreed to release them subject to a new Tenant being found and the Tenant paying for rent up to when this occurred. The Landlord provided copies of text messages between the parties which showed the Landlord clearly conveyed these requirements. The Tenant read and understood the requirement to pay rent until a new Tenant was found because they responded that they could not cover rent for this property and a new property.
The Tenant claimed that they had given notice to vacate on 31 December 2022 and they paid the advertising fee for the property. They did not owe any rent arrears beyond the 31 December 2023. They had dealt with a different Property Manager, namely Michelle Frew after they had notified the Landlord of the early termination. Ms Frew was not present at the hearing. The Tenant advised she understood all she had to pay was advertising costs and then nothing further was required after she vacated. The Tenant referred to email correspondence between herself and Ms Frew which confirmed the Landlord agreed to the cessation of rent liability after 31 December 2022. In perusing the email correspondence however, there was nothing confirming the Landlord consented to the Tenant being released early from the fixed term without having to pay any further rent. After not hearing from the Landlord after a few weeks when she moved out, the Tenant construed the Landlords actions and communication as meaning she was no longer liable for rent until she received an email for outstanding rent arrears.
The Landlord submitted Miss Frew never told the Tenant she could be released from the tenancy without paying any further rent. The email correspondence referred to by the Tenant only confirmed the Landlord would install a new lock box but not that their liability would end when they vacated. The law
The usual legal position with a fixed-term contract is that the term of the contract will be applied strictly, and it is only in limited circumstances that a court or tribunal will interfere with it. For residential tenancies, one of those circumstances is found in s 66 Residential Tenancies Act 1986, which allows for the reduction of fixed term tenancy agreements. The Tenant did not apply for this in this instance.
In considering the evidence, I find it more likely than not that the Landlord ended the fixed term tenancy on 13 February 2023 and the rent records support the amount of arrears claimed. This was a fixed term for three years which is a considerably long condition that was unlikely to be overlooked. The Tenant was aware of this condition when they signed the agreement because they had a whole month to consider it before the tenancy started. To then expect to end the tenancy very early and claim they were not aware or told by the Landlord of the ongoing rent liability is irrelevant. This is an obligation of the Tenant which they agreed to when they signed up to the tenancy. The Tenants supporting evidence also did not actually prove the Landlord agreed to cease the Tenants liability for rent arrears once they vacated.
I find that it is more likely than not, that the date of termination was 13 February 2023 and award the amount claimed for rent arrears.
The amounts ordered are proved.

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.
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. The Landlord submitted there were stacks of rubbish they had to remove and dog faeces everywhere. The grass was nearly knee height so they had to mow the lawns. The recycling bin was full of items such as a mop that should not have been in there so the Landlord had to sort the rubbish out. An invoice was provided for the rubbish removal and lawn mowing.
The Tenant refuted this stating when they moved into the property, they had to clear up a lot of the rubbish because the property was not clean and tidy. They estimated the rubbish they left when they moved out would have taken an hour to remove so the amount the Landlord was requesting was excessive. They also had professional cleaners attend the property so it is unlikely they would have left a mess as the Landlord had claimed.
In considering the evidence, I find it more likely than not that the Tenant did not leave the lawns clean and tidy or remove the rubbish from the invoice provided by the Landlord. The Tenant also did not provide evidence that a professional cleaner had attended to the rubbish at the property.
The amounts ordered are proved.
The Tenant did not return the keys so the Landlord claimed costs for a lock smith to rekey two doors. An invoice was provided from a locksmith.
The Tenant disputed the locksmiths costs stating they left the keys with their own cleaner they had organised. This was the first time they had heard of the keys not being returned to the Landlord.
In considering the evidence, the Tenant admitted they did not return the keys to the Landlord but gave it to their own cleaner they had hired. The Landlord did not receive this from the cleaner however the onus is on the Tenant to return the keys or ensure whoever they left it with returned it to the Landlord.
The amounts ordered are proved.
As Deepshikha Narayan has wholly succeeded with the claim the Tenant must reimburse the filing fee.
As neither party has sought name suppression, this has not been ordered.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4618432 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 6, 14 Albert Street, Otahuhu, Auckland 1062

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4618432 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 6, 14 Albert Street, Otahuhu, Auckland 1062

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent arrears?

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

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent arrears?

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

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions