What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4641431 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

How much money was awarded in case 4641431?

Cleaning: $140.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $126.37 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $847.85 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $230.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $163.62 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4641431?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4641431?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9535719-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4641431 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

How much money was awarded in case 4641431?

Cleaning: $140.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $126.37 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $847.85 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $230.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $163.62 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4641431?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4641431?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9535719-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

138 Whau Valley Road, Whau Valley, Whangarei 0112 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4641431 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4641431 — net $1,528.28 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$847.85	Rent arrears
Water rates	$163.62	Water rates
Window repairs	$126.37	Window repairs
Rubbish removal	$230.00	Rubbish removal
Cleaning	$140.00	Cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,528.28
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,528.28

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord name and identifying details.
Charlotte Anderson is to pay [the landlord/s] $1,528.28 from the bond calculated per the table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of [()] immediately apportioned as follows: [The landlord/s] :

Reasons

Background

The tenancy ended on 21 July 2023.
The landlord’s application seeks rent arrears, water rates, cleaning, rubbish removal, and reglazing costs.
The tenant’s application raises issues relating to healthy homes (mould, draughts), and change of property manager without notification.
The hearing took place in Whangarei on 4 October 2023. Both parties attended the hearing. [The landlord’s representative] represented the landlord. Landlord’s application Rent arrears and water rates
Ms Anderson accepted the claim for rent arrears.
The claim seeks $163.62 for the tenant’s water use during the tenancy.
Ms Anderson disputed the claim on the grounds that: a. The amount of water used is not proven. b. The landlord failed to give her an invoice for water during the tenancy.
The landlord’s calculation of water use is based on the meter reading at the beginning of the tenancy (per a figure written in the tenancy agreement) and the meter reading at the end of the tenancy (per a photograph taken by [the landlord’s representative] at the final inspection).
Ms Anderson submitted that there is no verification of the initial reading, such as a photograph.
I am satisfied that the fact that the figure is written on the agreement, which is signed by both parties and forms the basis of the tenancy, is sufficient.
The amount of water used during the tenancy is proven.
In Woollams v Simpson 1 the District Court held that there is an implied term in every tenancy that that the landlord will pass on water rates invoices promptly to the tenant. Judge McElrea commented: How can a tenant be expected to pay for a regular charge such as a quarterly charge unless it is told the amount of the charge from time to time? That makes a nonsense of any attempt to budget [...] It makes a nonsense of any proper concept of financial management as between parties to a commercial arrangement. 1 DC Auckland CIV: 2005-004-1583, 16 March 2006
In Woollams the landlord provided no water accounts to the tenant during the tenancy, and at the end of the tenancy sought approximately three years of water rates totalling $2,299.55.
In this instance Ms Anderson’s tenancy lasted a year and her total water use was $163.62.
[REDACTED]. An invoice was issued in or around September 2022, and in or around March 2023.
[The landlord’s representative] acknowledged that these invoices were not passed on to Ms Anderson. [REDACTED].
I accept that none of this difficulty is Ms Anderson’s concern. Per Woollams, she is entitled to receive regular water rates invoices. However, I also note that the principal considerations in the reduction of water rates that the Court granted in Woollams were the landlord’s unexplained failure to provide regular invoices and the fact that the tenant was presented with an extremely large bill at the end of a long tenancy.
Those elements are not present in this instance.
My finding is that there is no reasonable basis to waive Ms Anderson’s responsibility to pay for the water that she consumed during the tenancy. Windows
The claim seeks the cost of re-glazing three cracked panes.
Two were in a wooden framed set of windows. Ms Anderson submitted that this damage happened on the last day of the tenancy. She submitted that the windows were always difficult to open and close, they would often ‘stick’ and would require some force to close fully so that they could be latched. Ms Anderson submitted that when she pulled the window closed after cleaning, the panes cracked.
Ms Anderson submitted that the other damaged pane (a star-pattern crack in the window in a bedroom) was present at the beginning of the tenancy.
[The landlord’s representative] submitted that the damage to the bedroom window was not present at the beginning of the tenancy, but she did not have a copy of the entry inspection report at the hearing. [The landlord’s representative] withdrew this part of the claim, and it was agreed that the value of the withdrawn claim would be one-third of the [Glass Company] invoice.
With regards to the balance of the claim for the two cracked panes, in response to Ms Anderson’s argument about ‘sticky’ joinery, [the landlord’s representative] provided a video showing her colleague opening and closing these windows without a great deal of difficulty. However, I accept that wooden joinery can swell and shrink in different weather conditions. Ms Anderson’s tenancy ended in mid-July. Ms Anderson’s description of the windows as “old school” is not unjustified. I accept Ms Anderson’s statement that the windows often have to be pulled closed with a ‘jolt’, and this continued stress will have an effect on the life expectancy of the glass.
Having regard to these factors I will hold Ms Anderson liable for half of the cost of re-glazing these panes. Rubbish removal
The claim seeks $230.00 for rubbish removal per an invoice from [Rubbish Removers]
Tenants must remove all rubbish at the end of the tenancy.
Ms Anderson expressed some concerns about the invoiced amount, but I am satisfied that the hourly rate, the amount of labour, and the dumping costs are fair and reasonable. Cleaning
The claim seeks $140.00 for cleaning per an invoice from [Cleaner], a local cleaner.
Tenants must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy at the end of the tenancy.
[The landlord’s representative] provided photographs from the final inspection.
The photographs show some dusty areas, and there were some marks on a wall. Ms Anderson also acknowledged that she overlooked a drawer, a cupboard, and a small gap around the stove.
The photographs also show some mould on the ceilings, which is an issue in the tenant’s application, discussed below.
The property was generally clean and tidy, but some areas required more attention and the small claim for cleaning is justified on the evidence provided to me. Tenant’s application Mould, dampness
Ms Anderson submitted that mould developed on walls and ceilings. The curtains also got mouldy, as did some of Ms Anderson’s furniture and personal belongings, in particular her shoes.
Ms Anderson submitted that she did not bother raising this issue with [the landlord’s representative] during her tenancy because the usual response was that it is difficult to find tradespeople. Ms Anderson submitted that near the end of the tenancy she stopped cleaning away the mould to show the property manager the extent of the problem.
[The landlord’s representative] submitted that Ms Anderson did not ventilate the property adequately during the tenancy. [The landlord’s representative] submitted that Ms Anderson did not raise the problem with mould during the tenancy (apart from an area above the shower), although she did raise other issues, and she did not include this issue in her previous Tenancy Tribunal application. [The landlord’s representative] submitted that the previous tenant, and the tenant who has moved in since Ms Anderson vacated, have not made any complaints about mould.
The property is a 2-bedroom unit. It has a heat pump in the main living area and (small) extractor fans in the kitchen and bathroom.
Ms Anderson provided a photograph of mould on her shoes, and the end of tenancy photos do show mould on walls and ceilings.
Those photographs show that there was mould inside the premises at a more than minimal level.
It is impossible to know the cause or causes of the mould. I accept that the house was healthy homes compliant.
In any event the fact that Ms Anderson did not raise this issue during the tenancy means that it cannot be argued that the landlords failed to attend to it promptly.
There is no basis for an award of compensation or exemplary damages under this heading. Gaps around windows
Ms Anderson submitted that there are gaps around some of the wooden joinery, in particular in the dining room, such that the curtains would blow around even when the windows were closed.
[The landlord’s representative] provided a copy of the most recent healthy homes assessment report (September 2022) which states that there are no gaps around the windows.
Presumably this means that there are no gaps that exceed the healthy homes maximum of 3mm. I accept [the landlord’s representative] argument that some amount of gap is necessary in wooden joinery to allow for natural expansion and contraction.
I acknowledge Ms Anderson’s experience of living in the property. However, the evidence provided to me does not establish that there are any gaps around windows that exceed 3mm. Notification of change of landlord
Ms Anderson had always dealt with [the landlord’s representative] during the tenancy, and she was concerned when [the landlord’s representative] ceased to be involved for a period of time, and she had to deal with another staff member.
I acknowledge those concerns, but changing an individual property manager within the same business does not amount to a change of landlord that requires notice to the tenant under sections 15 and 16 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
[The landlord’s representative] explained the personal circumstances that forced her to step away from work at that time, which Ms Anderson was not aware of. Filing fee, bond, name suppression
The landlord sought name suppression. Name suppression is granted on the basis that the landlord has been substantially successful in the proceedings.
Ms Anderson did not seek name suppression.
The landlord was successful in its application, and I will also award the landlord the filing fee of $20.44.
The landlord will receive $1,528.28 from the bond. The balance will be released to the tenant.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4641431 — net $1,528.28 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$847.85	Rent arrears
Water rates	$163.62	Water rates
Window repairs	$126.37	Window repairs
Rubbish removal	$230.00	Rubbish removal
Cleaning	$140.00	Cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,528.28
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,528.28

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord name and identifying details.
Charlotte Anderson is to pay [the landlord/s] $1,528.28 from the bond calculated per the table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of [()] immediately apportioned as follows: [The landlord/s] :

Reasons

Background

The tenancy ended on 21 July 2023.
The landlord’s application seeks rent arrears, water rates, cleaning, rubbish removal, and reglazing costs.
The tenant’s application raises issues relating to healthy homes (mould, draughts), and change of property manager without notification.
The hearing took place in Whangarei on 4 October 2023. Both parties attended the hearing. [The landlord’s representative] represented the landlord. Landlord’s application Rent arrears and water rates
Ms Anderson accepted the claim for rent arrears.
The claim seeks $163.62 for the tenant’s water use during the tenancy.
Ms Anderson disputed the claim on the grounds that: a. The amount of water used is not proven. b. The landlord failed to give her an invoice for water during the tenancy.
The landlord’s calculation of water use is based on the meter reading at the beginning of the tenancy (per a figure written in the tenancy agreement) and the meter reading at the end of the tenancy (per a photograph taken by [the landlord’s representative] at the final inspection).
Ms Anderson submitted that there is no verification of the initial reading, such as a photograph.
I am satisfied that the fact that the figure is written on the agreement, which is signed by both parties and forms the basis of the tenancy, is sufficient.
The amount of water used during the tenancy is proven.
In Woollams v Simpson 1 the District Court held that there is an implied term in every tenancy that that the landlord will pass on water rates invoices promptly to the tenant. Judge McElrea commented: How can a tenant be expected to pay for a regular charge such as a quarterly charge unless it is told the amount of the charge from time to time? That makes a nonsense of any attempt to budget [...] It makes a nonsense of any proper concept of financial management as between parties to a commercial arrangement. 1 DC Auckland CIV: 2005-004-1583, 16 March 2006
In Woollams the landlord provided no water accounts to the tenant during the tenancy, and at the end of the tenancy sought approximately three years of water rates totalling $2,299.55.
In this instance Ms Anderson’s tenancy lasted a year and her total water use was $163.62.
[REDACTED]. An invoice was issued in or around September 2022, and in or around March 2023.
[The landlord’s representative] acknowledged that these invoices were not passed on to Ms Anderson. [REDACTED].
I accept that none of this difficulty is Ms Anderson’s concern. Per Woollams, she is entitled to receive regular water rates invoices. However, I also note that the principal considerations in the reduction of water rates that the Court granted in Woollams were the landlord’s unexplained failure to provide regular invoices and the fact that the tenant was presented with an extremely large bill at the end of a long tenancy.
Those elements are not present in this instance.
My finding is that there is no reasonable basis to waive Ms Anderson’s responsibility to pay for the water that she consumed during the tenancy. Windows
The claim seeks the cost of re-glazing three cracked panes.
Two were in a wooden framed set of windows. Ms Anderson submitted that this damage happened on the last day of the tenancy. She submitted that the windows were always difficult to open and close, they would often ‘stick’ and would require some force to close fully so that they could be latched. Ms Anderson submitted that when she pulled the window closed after cleaning, the panes cracked.
Ms Anderson submitted that the other damaged pane (a star-pattern crack in the window in a bedroom) was present at the beginning of the tenancy.
[The landlord’s representative] submitted that the damage to the bedroom window was not present at the beginning of the tenancy, but she did not have a copy of the entry inspection report at the hearing. [The landlord’s representative] withdrew this part of the claim, and it was agreed that the value of the withdrawn claim would be one-third of the [Glass Company] invoice.
With regards to the balance of the claim for the two cracked panes, in response to Ms Anderson’s argument about ‘sticky’ joinery, [the landlord’s representative] provided a video showing her colleague opening and closing these windows without a great deal of difficulty. However, I accept that wooden joinery can swell and shrink in different weather conditions. Ms Anderson’s tenancy ended in mid-July. Ms Anderson’s description of the windows as “old school” is not unjustified. I accept Ms Anderson’s statement that the windows often have to be pulled closed with a ‘jolt’, and this continued stress will have an effect on the life expectancy of the glass.
Having regard to these factors I will hold Ms Anderson liable for half of the cost of re-glazing these panes. Rubbish removal
The claim seeks $230.00 for rubbish removal per an invoice from [Rubbish Removers]
Tenants must remove all rubbish at the end of the tenancy.
Ms Anderson expressed some concerns about the invoiced amount, but I am satisfied that the hourly rate, the amount of labour, and the dumping costs are fair and reasonable. Cleaning
The claim seeks $140.00 for cleaning per an invoice from [Cleaner], a local cleaner.
Tenants must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy at the end of the tenancy.
[The landlord’s representative] provided photographs from the final inspection.
The photographs show some dusty areas, and there were some marks on a wall. Ms Anderson also acknowledged that she overlooked a drawer, a cupboard, and a small gap around the stove.
The photographs also show some mould on the ceilings, which is an issue in the tenant’s application, discussed below.
The property was generally clean and tidy, but some areas required more attention and the small claim for cleaning is justified on the evidence provided to me. Tenant’s application Mould, dampness
Ms Anderson submitted that mould developed on walls and ceilings. The curtains also got mouldy, as did some of Ms Anderson’s furniture and personal belongings, in particular her shoes.
Ms Anderson submitted that she did not bother raising this issue with [the landlord’s representative] during her tenancy because the usual response was that it is difficult to find tradespeople. Ms Anderson submitted that near the end of the tenancy she stopped cleaning away the mould to show the property manager the extent of the problem.
[The landlord’s representative] submitted that Ms Anderson did not ventilate the property adequately during the tenancy. [The landlord’s representative] submitted that Ms Anderson did not raise the problem with mould during the tenancy (apart from an area above the shower), although she did raise other issues, and she did not include this issue in her previous Tenancy Tribunal application. [The landlord’s representative] submitted that the previous tenant, and the tenant who has moved in since Ms Anderson vacated, have not made any complaints about mould.
The property is a 2-bedroom unit. It has a heat pump in the main living area and (small) extractor fans in the kitchen and bathroom.
Ms Anderson provided a photograph of mould on her shoes, and the end of tenancy photos do show mould on walls and ceilings.
Those photographs show that there was mould inside the premises at a more than minimal level.
It is impossible to know the cause or causes of the mould. I accept that the house was healthy homes compliant.
In any event the fact that Ms Anderson did not raise this issue during the tenancy means that it cannot be argued that the landlords failed to attend to it promptly.
There is no basis for an award of compensation or exemplary damages under this heading. Gaps around windows
Ms Anderson submitted that there are gaps around some of the wooden joinery, in particular in the dining room, such that the curtains would blow around even when the windows were closed.
[The landlord’s representative] provided a copy of the most recent healthy homes assessment report (September 2022) which states that there are no gaps around the windows.
Presumably this means that there are no gaps that exceed the healthy homes maximum of 3mm. I accept [the landlord’s representative] argument that some amount of gap is necessary in wooden joinery to allow for natural expansion and contraction.
I acknowledge Ms Anderson’s experience of living in the property. However, the evidence provided to me does not establish that there are any gaps around windows that exceed 3mm. Notification of change of landlord
Ms Anderson had always dealt with [the landlord’s representative] during the tenancy, and she was concerned when [the landlord’s representative] ceased to be involved for a period of time, and she had to deal with another staff member.
I acknowledge those concerns, but changing an individual property manager within the same business does not amount to a change of landlord that requires notice to the tenant under sections 15 and 16 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
[The landlord’s representative] explained the personal circumstances that forced her to step away from work at that time, which Ms Anderson was not aware of. Filing fee, bond, name suppression
The landlord sought name suppression. Name suppression is granted on the basis that the landlord has been substantially successful in the proceedings.
Ms Anderson did not seek name suppression.
The landlord was successful in its application, and I will also award the landlord the filing fee of $20.44.
The landlord will receive $1,528.28 from the bond. The balance will be released to the tenant.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4641431 — Rent arrears at 138 Whau Valley Road, Whau Valley, Whangarei 0112

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4641431 — Rent arrears at 138 Whau Valley Road, Whau Valley, Whangarei 0112

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions