What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4633830 about?

The tribunal order states: Connie Tapuni must pay [The landlord/s] $1,109.45 immediately, calculated as

How much money was awarded in case 4633830?

Individual award amounts are in the official MoJ PDF. Claim amounts appear on this page when claims and net totals reconcile.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4633830?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4633830?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10018023-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4633830 about?

The tribunal order states: Connie Tapuni must pay [The landlord/s] $1,109.45 immediately, calculated as

How much money was awarded in case 4633830?

Individual award amounts are in the official MoJ PDF. Claim amounts appear on this page when claims and net totals reconcile.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4633830?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4633830?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10018023-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

17 Richardson Street, Saint Kilda, Dunedin 9012 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4633830 — Rent arrears

Order

Connie Tapuni must pay [The landlord/s] $1,109.45 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the rescheduled hearing.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 28/5/2023. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at 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. The tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord claimed compensation as follows: a. $207.00 for cleaning b. $368.00 for carpet cleaning c. $260.00 for changing locks.
In support of the claim the landlord provided invoices, a statement from the cleaner and photographs.
I am satisfied from the evidence that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
In addition, the tenant did not return the keys.
An award has been made for the cleaning and lock change.
However, due to the lack of evidence about the state of the carpets no award has been made for carpet cleaning and that claim fails.
Just because a tenancy agreement contains a clause that if the tenant has pets then carpets must be cleaned, such a clause is unenforceable without evidence of whether the carpets did in fact need cleaning.

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.
The landlord claimed $790.00 for repairs to holes in walls and bathroom blind.
In support of the claim the landlord provided photographs taken in June 2023 and at the end of the tenancy and an invoice.
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.
Despite the tenancy having started on 9/8/2019 I am satisfied that the damage occurred after 27/8/2019.
Taking into account the type of damage I consider it was intentional and was not fair wear and tear.
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.
As [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.
Suppression is granted to the landlord pursuant to section 95A(1) because they were largely successful with the claim.

Order

Connie Tapuni must pay [The landlord/s] $1,109.45 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the rescheduled hearing.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 28/5/2023. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at 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. The tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord claimed compensation as follows: a. $207.00 for cleaning b. $368.00 for carpet cleaning c. $260.00 for changing locks.
In support of the claim the landlord provided invoices, a statement from the cleaner and photographs.
I am satisfied from the evidence that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
In addition, the tenant did not return the keys.
An award has been made for the cleaning and lock change.
However, due to the lack of evidence about the state of the carpets no award has been made for carpet cleaning and that claim fails.
Just because a tenancy agreement contains a clause that if the tenant has pets then carpets must be cleaned, such a clause is unenforceable without evidence of whether the carpets did in fact need cleaning.

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.
The landlord claimed $790.00 for repairs to holes in walls and bathroom blind.
In support of the claim the landlord provided photographs taken in June 2023 and at the end of the tenancy and an invoice.
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.
Despite the tenancy having started on 9/8/2019 I am satisfied that the damage occurred after 27/8/2019.
Taking into account the type of damage I consider it was intentional and was not fair wear and tear.
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.
As [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.
Suppression is granted to the landlord pursuant to section 95A(1) because they were largely successful with the claim.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4633830 — Rent arrears at 17 Richardson Street, Saint Kilda, Dunedin 9012

Tenancy Tribunal case 4633830 — Rent arrears at 17 Richardson Street, Saint Kilda, Dunedin 9012

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?