What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4621929 about?

The tribunal order states: Shardey Martin must pay [The landlord/s] $1,278.61 immediately, calculated as

How much money was awarded in case 4621929?

Cleaning: $196.48 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $384.10 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $379.16 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $298.43 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4621929?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4621929?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10183381-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4621929 about?

The tribunal order states: Shardey Martin must pay [The landlord/s] $1,278.61 immediately, calculated as

How much money was awarded in case 4621929?

Cleaning: $196.48 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $384.10 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $379.16 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $298.43 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4621929?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4621929?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10183381-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit/Flat 3, 10 Raukawa Street, Stokes Valley, Lower Hutt Tenancy Tribunal Case 4621929 — Cleanliness

Tenantcheck Insights

Unit/Flat 3, 10 Raukawa Street, Stokes Valley, Lower Hutt Tenancy Tribunal Case 4621929 — Cleanliness | 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 4621929 — net $1,278.61 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rubbish removal	$298.43	Rubbish removal
Carpet Cleaning	$196.48	Carpet Cleaning
Carpet Cleaning	$384.10	Carpet Cleaning
Window repairs	$379.16	Window repairs
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,278.61
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,278.61

Claims and awards for application 4621929 — net $1,278.61 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rubbish removal

Amount: $298.43
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal

Carpet Cleaning

Amount: $196.48
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Carpet Cleaning

Carpet Cleaning

Amount: $384.10
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Carpet Cleaning

Window repairs

Amount: $379.16
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Window repairs

Filing fee reimbursement

Amount: $20.44
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Filing fee reimbursement

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Carpet Cleaning Filing Fee Property damage Rubbish Removal

Order

Shardey Martin must pay [The landlord/s] $1,278.61 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

Ms Staunton attended the hearing for the landlord, there was no appearance for Ms Martin. As she has been served with the notice of hearing but did not attend, the hearing went ahead in her absence.
The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following 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 security devices, and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA). Rubbish
The landlord has established in evidence that the tenant did not remove all rubbish and belongings when they vacated the property in breach of section 40(1)(e)(ii) of the RTA. It took one of the landlord’s employees four hours to dispose of the items.
I consider the claim established in evidence and reasonable in the circumstances. Carpets
The landlord has established that at the end of the tenancy there were some stains in the carpet, and it was smelling due to the housing of dogs during the tenancy inside the property in contravention of the tenancy agreement. They had Jaes carpet cleaners treat the carpet twice but the stains and smell were unable to be completely removed.
They claim compensation for having to clean the carpets and also for having to replace them. They say that although the property has been re-tenanted the owner is intending to replace the carpets when they have the money to do so as the tenants are complaining about the smell.
I am satisfied that the landlord has established in evidence the need for the carpet cleans. The photos show stains, and the invoices reference the stains and smell. Accordingly, I consider it reasonable that the tenants reimburse the landlord these costs.
With respect to the claim for replacing the carpet, I do not find this justified. Firstly, the landlord was aware the tenants were keeping dogs in breach of the tenancy agreement however no notices to remedy were issued to stop the breach. Pursuant to section 49 of the RTA, they are required to mitigate any such breach and a notice to remedy is the first step in doing so.
Secondly, the landlord was not aware of the age of the carpets and had not provided any corroborating evidence supporting their claims that the current tenants were complaining, and the two treatments had not been effective.
As no loss has been established in evidence, a claim for compensation must fail. Accordingly, the claim for compensation for having to replace the carpets or in the alternative accelerated depreciation, 1 is dismissed. 1 Accelerated depreciation is the concept that an item has aged more quickly than reasonably anticipated, however is still fit for purpose.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The landlord claims compensation for having to replace the bottom pane in the glass sliding door. The photos show it missing and covered with cardboard.
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.
The landlord has established in evidence that this damage occurred during the tenancy, and I consider it more likely than not that it was intentional damage by the tenants given it was not notified and has just been covered up. Accordingly, I approve the claim as sought.
Because [The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee and approved their application for compensation.

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 4621929 — net $1,278.61 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rubbish removal	$298.43	Rubbish removal
Carpet Cleaning	$196.48	Carpet Cleaning
Carpet Cleaning	$384.10	Carpet Cleaning
Window repairs	$379.16	Window repairs
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,278.61
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,278.61

Claims and awards for application 4621929 — net $1,278.61 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rubbish removal

Amount: $298.43
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal

Carpet Cleaning

Amount: $196.48
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Carpet Cleaning

Carpet Cleaning

Amount: $384.10
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Carpet Cleaning

Window repairs

Amount: $379.16
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Window repairs

Filing fee reimbursement

Amount: $20.44
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Filing fee reimbursement

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Carpet Cleaning Filing Fee Property damage Rubbish Removal

Order

Shardey Martin must pay [The landlord/s] $1,278.61 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

Ms Staunton attended the hearing for the landlord, there was no appearance for Ms Martin. As she has been served with the notice of hearing but did not attend, the hearing went ahead in her absence.
The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following 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 security devices, and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA). Rubbish
The landlord has established in evidence that the tenant did not remove all rubbish and belongings when they vacated the property in breach of section 40(1)(e)(ii) of the RTA. It took one of the landlord’s employees four hours to dispose of the items.
I consider the claim established in evidence and reasonable in the circumstances. Carpets
The landlord has established that at the end of the tenancy there were some stains in the carpet, and it was smelling due to the housing of dogs during the tenancy inside the property in contravention of the tenancy agreement. They had Jaes carpet cleaners treat the carpet twice but the stains and smell were unable to be completely removed.
They claim compensation for having to clean the carpets and also for having to replace them. They say that although the property has been re-tenanted the owner is intending to replace the carpets when they have the money to do so as the tenants are complaining about the smell.
I am satisfied that the landlord has established in evidence the need for the carpet cleans. The photos show stains, and the invoices reference the stains and smell. Accordingly, I consider it reasonable that the tenants reimburse the landlord these costs.
With respect to the claim for replacing the carpet, I do not find this justified. Firstly, the landlord was aware the tenants were keeping dogs in breach of the tenancy agreement however no notices to remedy were issued to stop the breach. Pursuant to section 49 of the RTA, they are required to mitigate any such breach and a notice to remedy is the first step in doing so.
Secondly, the landlord was not aware of the age of the carpets and had not provided any corroborating evidence supporting their claims that the current tenants were complaining, and the two treatments had not been effective.
As no loss has been established in evidence, a claim for compensation must fail. Accordingly, the claim for compensation for having to replace the carpets or in the alternative accelerated depreciation, 1 is dismissed. 1 Accelerated depreciation is the concept that an item has aged more quickly than reasonably anticipated, however is still fit for purpose.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The landlord claims compensation for having to replace the bottom pane in the glass sliding door. The photos show it missing and covered with cardboard.
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.
The landlord has established in evidence that this damage occurred during the tenancy, and I consider it more likely than not that it was intentional damage by the tenants given it was not notified and has just been covered up. Accordingly, I approve the claim as sought.
Because [The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee and approved their application for compensation.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4621929 — Cleanliness at Unit/Flat 3, 10 Raukawa Street, Stokes Valley, Lower Hutt

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4621929 — Cleanliness at Unit/Flat 3, 10 Raukawa Street, Stokes Valley, Lower Hutt

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