What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4626129 about?

The tribunal order states: Stefan Broughton and Brooke Bekhuis must pay [The landlord/s] $9,767.48

How much money was awarded in case 4626129?

Bifold Door Handle: $295.20 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $1,196.00 awarded to landlord; Front Door Handle: $160.98 awarded to landlord; Heated Towel Rail Bracket: $33.67 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 4553209 D…: $6,750.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $3,214.28 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Single Mattress: $167.99 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $467.36 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $126.50 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $355.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4626129?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4626129?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9597350-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4626129 about?

The tribunal order states: Stefan Broughton and Brooke Bekhuis must pay [The landlord/s] $9,767.48

How much money was awarded in case 4626129?

Bifold Door Handle: $295.20 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $1,196.00 awarded to landlord; Front Door Handle: $160.98 awarded to landlord; Heated Towel Rail Bracket: $33.67 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 4553209 D…: $6,750.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $3,214.28 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Single Mattress: $167.99 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $467.36 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $126.50 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $355.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4626129?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4626129?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9597350-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4626129 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4626129 — 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 4626129 — net $9,767.48 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$3,214.28	Rent arrears
Previous order application 4553209 dated 15/05/2023	$6,750.00	Previous order application 4553209 dated 15/05/2023
Water rates	$355.50	5. The water rates arrears are $355.50.
Cleaning	$1,196.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal: Travel to dump x 11	$126.50	Rubbish removal: Travel to dump x 11
Rubbish removal	$467.36	Rubbish removal
Heated Towel rail bracket	$33.67	Heated Towel rail bracket
Bifold door handle	$295.20	Bifold door handle
Front door handle	$160.98	Front door handle
Replace furnishings: Single Mattress	$167.99	Replace furnishings: Single Mattress
Net award	$9,767.48
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$9,767.48

Claims and awards for application 4626129 — net $9,767.48 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears

Amount: $3,214.28
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears

Previous order application 4553209 dated 15/05/2023

Amount: $6,750.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Previous order application 4553209 dated 15/05/2023

Water rates

Amount: $355.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: 5. The water rates arrears are $355.50.

Cleaning

Amount: $1,196.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning

Rubbish removal: Travel to dump x 11

Amount: $126.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal: Travel to dump x 11

Dismissed claims

Filing Fee
Lightbulbs

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Rent arrears Rubbish Removal Water Rates Filing Fee Property damage

Order

Stefan Broughton and Brooke Bekhuis must pay [The landlord/s] $9,767.48 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 15 May 2023 under application TT 4553209.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,000.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The landlord attended 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.
The onus or job of proving the landlord claims is on the landlord. They must prove the claims to the civil standard called the balance of probabilities. In other words, the landlord must persuade the Tribunal that the claim is more likely than not to be correct. If they are unable to attain that standard, then the claim must be dismissed.

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

The tenancy ended on 15 June 2023. The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy. The net rent amount owing after deducting the amount remaining due under TT 4553209 is $3,214.28. The sum of $6,750.00 remains owing under the previous order which has been incorporated in this order for enforcement purposes.
The water rates arrears are $355.50.

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. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. 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. I have reduced the claim for labour to 16 hours or 2 full days work. The evidence of the landlord was not sufficient to persuade me that the amount claimed was to bring the premises to the required standard of reasonably clean and tidy. I do not accept that I have been provided with evidence to justify 65 hours labour to bring the premises to that standard. No photos or statements from the contractor were provided.
The landlord has filed a claim for the replacement of light bulbs. The sole evidence provided was an invoice from a contractor for 1 bulb at a cost of $113.13 plus GST. I would require further evidence to justify a claim of this amount and the claim is dismissed.
The landlord claimed $620.00 plus GST for the cleaning of carpets. The sole evidence provided was an invoice from the contractor. The landlord said that they had seen the carpets in a video call from the contractor. No photographic evidence was provided for the Tribunal to view, nor a statement from the contractor. The tenant said that the carpet had been stained at the commencement of the tenancy. They further indicated that they had been told by the landlord that the carpet was to be replaced. The evidence provided is such that I am unable to say that the landlord has proven that it is more likely than not that the carpets required cleaning to bring them to a reasonably clean and tidy standard at the end of the tenancy.
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 careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.
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. The landlord is insured and has an excess with regards to reach and every claim of $1,250.00
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: • Front door handle • Bifold door handle. • Heated Towel rail bracket. • Single mattress
I find that the damage occurred during the tenancy. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved.
I have taken into account betterment and depreciation with regards to the mattress which was new in 2020. The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached their obligations and should not be better or worse off. In calculating depreciation, I have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.
The landlord claims $4,572.11 for enforcement costs. The claim relates to an invoice from a debt collection company. There is no legal basis for the tenant being liable for this claim. The tenant may have been liable for the District Court filing fee for enforcement of the order. Further, the claim is based on a commission of 25% of the debt. Once the bond has been released, the sum claimed as a commission would have been reduced. The claim is dismissed.
As [The landlord/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must order the tenant to reimburse the filing fee.
Both parties applied for name suppression. The landlord has been substantially successful, and suppression of the landlord details is ordered.
The tenant has not been wholly or substantially successful and the application by the tenant is dismissed.

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 4626129 — net $9,767.48 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$3,214.28	Rent arrears
Previous order application 4553209 dated 15/05/2023	$6,750.00	Previous order application 4553209 dated 15/05/2023
Water rates	$355.50	5. The water rates arrears are $355.50.
Cleaning	$1,196.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal: Travel to dump x 11	$126.50	Rubbish removal: Travel to dump x 11
Rubbish removal	$467.36	Rubbish removal
Heated Towel rail bracket	$33.67	Heated Towel rail bracket
Bifold door handle	$295.20	Bifold door handle
Front door handle	$160.98	Front door handle
Replace furnishings: Single Mattress	$167.99	Replace furnishings: Single Mattress
Net award	$9,767.48
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$9,767.48

Claims and awards for application 4626129 — net $9,767.48 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears

Amount: $3,214.28
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears

Previous order application 4553209 dated 15/05/2023

Amount: $6,750.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Previous order application 4553209 dated 15/05/2023

Water rates

Amount: $355.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: 5. The water rates arrears are $355.50.

Cleaning

Amount: $1,196.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning

Rubbish removal: Travel to dump x 11

Amount: $126.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal: Travel to dump x 11

Dismissed claims

Filing Fee
Lightbulbs

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Rent arrears Rubbish Removal Water Rates Filing Fee Property damage

Order

Stefan Broughton and Brooke Bekhuis must pay [The landlord/s] $9,767.48 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 15 May 2023 under application TT 4553209.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,000.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The landlord attended 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.
The onus or job of proving the landlord claims is on the landlord. They must prove the claims to the civil standard called the balance of probabilities. In other words, the landlord must persuade the Tribunal that the claim is more likely than not to be correct. If they are unable to attain that standard, then the claim must be dismissed.

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

The tenancy ended on 15 June 2023. The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy. The net rent amount owing after deducting the amount remaining due under TT 4553209 is $3,214.28. The sum of $6,750.00 remains owing under the previous order which has been incorporated in this order for enforcement purposes.
The water rates arrears are $355.50.

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. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. 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. I have reduced the claim for labour to 16 hours or 2 full days work. The evidence of the landlord was not sufficient to persuade me that the amount claimed was to bring the premises to the required standard of reasonably clean and tidy. I do not accept that I have been provided with evidence to justify 65 hours labour to bring the premises to that standard. No photos or statements from the contractor were provided.
The landlord has filed a claim for the replacement of light bulbs. The sole evidence provided was an invoice from a contractor for 1 bulb at a cost of $113.13 plus GST. I would require further evidence to justify a claim of this amount and the claim is dismissed.
The landlord claimed $620.00 plus GST for the cleaning of carpets. The sole evidence provided was an invoice from the contractor. The landlord said that they had seen the carpets in a video call from the contractor. No photographic evidence was provided for the Tribunal to view, nor a statement from the contractor. The tenant said that the carpet had been stained at the commencement of the tenancy. They further indicated that they had been told by the landlord that the carpet was to be replaced. The evidence provided is such that I am unable to say that the landlord has proven that it is more likely than not that the carpets required cleaning to bring them to a reasonably clean and tidy standard at the end of the tenancy.
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 careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.
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. The landlord is insured and has an excess with regards to reach and every claim of $1,250.00
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: • Front door handle • Bifold door handle. • Heated Towel rail bracket. • Single mattress
I find that the damage occurred during the tenancy. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved.
I have taken into account betterment and depreciation with regards to the mattress which was new in 2020. The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached their obligations and should not be better or worse off. In calculating depreciation, I have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.
The landlord claims $4,572.11 for enforcement costs. The claim relates to an invoice from a debt collection company. There is no legal basis for the tenant being liable for this claim. The tenant may have been liable for the District Court filing fee for enforcement of the order. Further, the claim is based on a commission of 25% of the debt. Once the bond has been released, the sum claimed as a commission would have been reduced. The claim is dismissed.
As [The landlord/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must order the tenant to reimburse the filing fee.
Both parties applied for name suppression. The landlord has been substantially successful, and suppression of the landlord details is ordered.
The tenant has not been wholly or substantially successful and the application by the tenant is dismissed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4626129 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4626129 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

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

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

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