What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4635589 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant/Landlord name and identifying

How much money was awarded in case 4635589?

Cleaning: $276.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $385.25 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Wall In Lounge: $244.39 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $95.24 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $260.20 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4635589?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4635589?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9434875-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4635589 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant/Landlord name and identifying

How much money was awarded in case 4635589?

Cleaning: $276.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $385.25 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Wall In Lounge: $244.39 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $95.24 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $260.20 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4635589?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4635589?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9434875-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4635589 — Cleanliness

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4635589 — net $1,230.53 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rubbish removal: furniture in garage	$95.24	Rubbish removal: furniture in garage
Rubbish removal: small shed	$260.20	Rubbish removal: small shed
Carpet Cleaning	$276.00	Carpet Cleaning
Cleaning	$385.25	Cleaning
Repairs: wall in lounge	$244.39	Repairs: wall in lounge
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,230.53
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,230.53

[The landlord/s representatives] appeared for the landlord. The tenant appeared.

On 09 June 2023 the Tribunal terminated the tenancy for rent arrears effective on 12 June 2023. The Tribunal also awarded the landlord rent arrears and a refund of the bond. The balance of the bond, $50.99 remaining with the Bond Centre. On 25 July 2023, the landlord filed a claim for cleaning, rubbish removal, damage, reimbursement of the filing fee, and a refund of the balance of the bond.

The onus of proving these claims rests with the landlord. The standard required is on the balance of probabilities. The landlord must establish more likely than not that the tenant has breached the terms of the agreement or provisions of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (The “Act”).

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

The landlord is claiming $ 385.25 for cleaning, $190.47 to remove furniture and other items from the garage left by the tenant, $ 260.20 to remove household rubbish left in a small garden shed, and $276.00 to clean the carpet.

At the end of the tenancy the tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and remove all rubbish. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) of the Act.

The property has three bedrooms, lounge, dining room, kitchen , laundry, conservatory, small garden shed, and a garage. The landlord has produced pre tenancy and end of tenancy inspection photographs. After considering the photographs and hearing from the parties, I am satisfied that the tenant has failed to leave the property reasonably clean, including the carpet. They have also failed to remove furniture from the garage, except for a wooden desk which appears to have been present at the commencement, and to remove household rubbish from a small garden shed. I reduce the amount claimed to remove the furniture from the garage by 50%, but all other amounts claimed are reasonable and awarded in full.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The landlord is claiming $244.39 to repair a hole in the lounge wall.

To succeed in a claim for damage the landlord must establish more likely than not that the damage 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.

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, which in this case is $1,000.00 per claim.

In dealing with the issue of carelessness the question is whether the tenant was exercising a degree of care and attention that a reasonable and prudent tenant would exercise in the circumstances. The test is objective and not based on the subjective opinion of the tenant or landlord. For the purposes of the Act carelessness has its normal meaning of lack of care, negligence, or lack of foresight.

The tenant states that they were using a barbell pole in the lounge. Before moving to another room to attend to a child, they rested the pole against a couch. Unfortunately, the pole rolled off the couch and caused a hole in the wall, about the size of a fist. The tenant states that they should have place the pole on the floor instead of leaning it against the couch. I am satisfied that the damage occurred during the tenancy and is likely the result of carelessness.

In awarding compensation for damage, the Tribunal must consider 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. In calculating depreciation, the Tribunal must consider the age and condition of the items concerned at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.

The amount claimed is less than the insurance excess and is awarded in full. I make no deduction for betterment or depreciation. The amount claimed is to repair the affected area only. Costs

As the landlord has been substantially successful, I order reimbursement of the filing fee. Name suppression

Both parties seek name suppression.

The landlord has been substantially successful and pursuant to section 95A of the Act is granted name suppression.

Section 95A (4) of the Act allows the Tribunal, on the application of any party to the proceedings, or on its own initiative, having regard to the interest of the parties and the public interest, to order that all or part of the evidence, or the name or any identifying particulars of any witnesses or party, not be published.

In the case of Erceg v Erceg [2016] NZSC 135 at [2]-[3],[13], and [18], the Supreme Court stated the principle of open justice was fundamental to the common law system of civil and criminal justice. The Court stated that it was well established that there were circumstances in which the interests of justice required departure from the general principle, but only to the extent required to serve the administration of justice. The Court referred to the administration of justice standard as capable of accommodating the particular circumstances of individual cases with consideration given to the broader public interest. The Court went onto endorse the principle in ASB Bank Ltd v AB [2010] 3 NZLR 427 (HC), stating, that there must be specific adverse consequences sufficient to justify an exception to the rule, adding that the threshold was a high one.

After hearing from the tenant, and the landlord, who supports name suppression for the tenant, I am satisfied that there are grounds relevant to the tenant’s personal circumstances that justify a departure from the general principle of open justice. The tenant is also granted name suppression.

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4635589 — net $1,230.53 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rubbish removal: furniture in garage	$95.24	Rubbish removal: furniture in garage
Rubbish removal: small shed	$260.20	Rubbish removal: small shed
Carpet Cleaning	$276.00	Carpet Cleaning
Cleaning	$385.25	Cleaning
Repairs: wall in lounge	$244.39	Repairs: wall in lounge
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,230.53
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,230.53

[The landlord/s representatives] appeared for the landlord. The tenant appeared.

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 and remove all rubbish. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) of the Act.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The landlord is claiming $244.39 to repair a hole in the lounge wall.

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, which in this case is $1,000.00 per claim.

The amount claimed is less than the insurance excess and is awarded in full. I make no deduction for betterment or depreciation. The amount claimed is to repair the affected area only. Costs

As the landlord has been substantially successful, I order reimbursement of the filing fee. Name suppression

Both parties seek name suppression.

The landlord has been substantially successful and pursuant to section 95A of the Act is granted name suppression.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4635589 — Cleanliness

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4635589 — Cleanliness

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