How much money was awarded in case 4632930?

Cleaning: $300.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $762.45 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 4548913 D…: $2,940.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $150.00 awarded to landlord; Bedroom Walls: $2,121.75 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Carpets: $1,600.00 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: uplift and inst…: $2,049.87 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $840.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4632930?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4632930?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9382157-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 4632930?

Cleaning: $300.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $762.45 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 4548913 D…: $2,940.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $150.00 awarded to landlord; Bedroom Walls: $2,121.75 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Carpets: $1,600.00 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: uplift and inst…: $2,049.87 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $840.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4632930?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4632930?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9382157-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

41 Mahua Road, Feilding, RD 7, Feilding 4777 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4632930 — Property damage

Q: What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4632930?

The tribunal order states: No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4632930 — net $10,784.95 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Previous order application 4548913 dated 30/05/2023	$2,940.44	Previous order application 4548913 dated 30/05/2023
Carpet Cleaning	$300.00	Carpet Cleaning
Cleaning	$762.45	Cleaning
Rubbish removal: including lawns and garden	$840.00	Rubbish removal: including lawns and garden
Repairs: bedroom walls	$2,121.75	Repairs: bedroom walls
Repairs	$150.00	Repairs
Replace furnishings: uplift and installation of carpets	$2,049.87	Replace furnishings: uplift and installation of carpets
Replace furnishings: carpets	$1,600.00	Replace furnishings: carpets
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$10,784.95
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$10,784.95

No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.

Michael Adam Love and Reyne Eliza Joan Love must pay Reh Property Management Limited Acting On Behalf Of Raewyn & Gavin Halls $10,784.95 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below. DescriptionLandlord Previous order application 4548913 dated 30/05/2023 $2,940.44 Carpet Cleaning$300.00 Cleaning$762.45 Rubbish removal: including lawns and garden$840.00 Repairs: bedroom walls$2,121.75 Repairs$150.00 Replace furnishings: uplift and installation of carpets $2,049.87 Replace furnishings: carpets$1,600.00 Filing fee reimbursement$20.44 Total award$10,784.95 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$10,784.95

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing.

The tenant did not attend the hearing. Service

This tenancy ended on 30 May 2023. The application was filed by the landlord with Tenancy Services on 11 August 2023.

Section 91A RTA provides that where a landlord files an application more than two months after the termination of the tenancy, any notice must be served on the tenant either: a. Personally; or b. By posting it to an address provided by the tenant within 2 months before the application; or c. By delivering it to where the tenant now lives and leaving it with someone who appears to be over 16 years of age; or d. By giving it to the tenant’s solicitor or authorised agent.

Service on this tenant was carried out by sending the documents to the address provide by the tenant to the landlord within two months before the application. Claims

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 and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986

The landlord provided photographic evidence that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.

There was extensive damage to the carpets caused by animal waste. The landlord obtained a report from an experienced carpet cleaner and an attempt was made to clean the carpet in one bedroom. This was unsuccessful. The landlord has proven that the carpets required replacement. The landlord remains entitled to the reasonable costs of trying to clean the carpet and obtaining the report as these cost were the direct result of the tenant’s actions.

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 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.

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 landlord provided photographic evidence that the following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. As noted above, the carpets were extensively damaged by animal waste. b. Knobs on the fireplace were missing. c. Curtains required rehanging. d. A bathroom towel rail was broken. e. There were painted handprints on an external door. f. There was extensive damage to the walls of two bedrooms requiring plastering and repainting.

The damage is more than fair wear and tear and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

Upon inspecting the property with an insurance assessor, the landlord found a dog, three cats and kittens shut inside the property. The landlord provided photographic evidence of the faeces and urine damage caused.

Conduct is intentional when it is deliberate and not accidental. The resulting damage will be intentional if the defendant meant to cause it or knew that it was virtually certain to result. On this basis, the tenant’s action in leaving their animals uncaged and unrestrained inside the property makes the resulting damage intentional damage.

The amounts ordered are proved.

I have considered betterment and depreciation. 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.

The landlord advised that the carpet was between five and six years old. The photographs of the carpet at the start of the tenancy show that it was in good order. While the IRD in its guideline IR 265 allows a life of eight years to a carpet in a rental property, the landlord’s evidence indicates that it would not have required replacement in two or three years.

It is appropriate that the landlord be awarded the full costs of uplifting and laying the carpet and one half of the cost of the new carpet.

Because Reh Property Management Limited Acting On Behalf Of Raewyn & Gavin Halls has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4632930 — net $10,784.95 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Previous order application 4548913 dated 30/05/2023	$2,940.44	Previous order application 4548913 dated 30/05/2023
Carpet Cleaning	$300.00	Carpet Cleaning
Cleaning	$762.45	Cleaning
Rubbish removal: including lawns and garden	$840.00	Rubbish removal: including lawns and garden
Repairs: bedroom walls	$2,121.75	Repairs: bedroom walls
Repairs	$150.00	Repairs
Replace furnishings: uplift and installation of carpets	$2,049.87	Replace furnishings: uplift and installation of carpets
Replace furnishings: carpets	$1,600.00	Replace furnishings: carpets
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$10,784.95
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$10,784.95

Order

No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.
Michael Adam Love and Reyne Eliza Joan Love must pay Reh Property Management Limited Acting On Behalf Of Raewyn & Gavin Halls $10,784.95 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below. DescriptionLandlord Previous order application 4548913 dated 30/05/2023 $2,940.44 Carpet Cleaning$300.00 Cleaning$762.45 Rubbish removal: including lawns and garden$840.00 Repairs: bedroom walls$2,121.75 Repairs$150.00 Replace furnishings: uplift and installation of carpets $2,049.87 Replace furnishings: carpets$1,600.00 Filing fee reimbursement$20.44 Total award$10,784.95 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$10,784.95

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing.
The tenant did not attend the hearing. Service
This tenancy ended on 30 May 2023. The application was filed by the landlord with Tenancy Services on 11 August 2023.
Section 91A RTA provides that where a landlord files an application more than two months after the termination of the tenancy, any notice must be served on the tenant either: a. Personally; or b. By posting it to an address provided by the tenant within 2 months before the application; or c. By delivering it to where the tenant now lives and leaving it with someone who appears to be over 16 years of age; or d. By giving it to the tenant’s solicitor or authorised agent.
Service on this tenant was carried out by sending the documents to the address provide by the tenant to the landlord within two months before the application. Claims
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 and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986
The landlord provided photographic evidence that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
There was extensive damage to the carpets caused by animal waste. The landlord obtained a report from an experienced carpet cleaner and an attempt was made to clean the carpet in one bedroom. This was unsuccessful. The landlord has proven that the carpets required replacement. The landlord remains entitled to the reasonable costs of trying to clean the carpet and obtaining the report as these cost were the direct result of the tenant’s actions.
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 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.
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 landlord provided photographic evidence that the following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. As noted above, the carpets were extensively damaged by animal waste. b. Knobs on the fireplace were missing. c. Curtains required rehanging. d. A bathroom towel rail was broken. e. There were painted handprints on an external door. f. There was extensive damage to the walls of two bedrooms requiring plastering and repainting.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
Upon inspecting the property with an insurance assessor, the landlord found a dog, three cats and kittens shut inside the property. The landlord provided photographic evidence of the faeces and urine damage caused.
Conduct is intentional when it is deliberate and not accidental. The resulting damage will be intentional if the defendant meant to cause it or knew that it was virtually certain to result. On this basis, the tenant’s action in leaving their animals uncaged and unrestrained inside the property makes the resulting damage intentional damage.
The amounts ordered are proved.
I have considered betterment and depreciation. 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.
The landlord advised that the carpet was between five and six years old. The photographs of the carpet at the start of the tenancy show that it was in good order. While the IRD in its guideline IR 265 allows a life of eight years to a carpet in a rental property, the landlord’s evidence indicates that it would not have required replacement in two or three years.
It is appropriate that the landlord be awarded the full costs of uplifting and laying the carpet and one half of the cost of the new carpet.
Because Reh Property Management Limited Acting On Behalf Of Raewyn & Gavin Halls has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4632930 — Property damage at 41 Mahua Road, Feilding, RD 7, Feilding 4777

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4632930 — Property damage at 41 Mahua Road, Feilding, RD 7, Feilding 4777

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

Property management

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions