How much money was awarded in case 4652692?

Cleaning: $215.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Plastering Materials: $589.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $175.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $175.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $49.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $103.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $593.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4652692?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4652692?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9544657-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 4652692?

Cleaning: $215.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Plastering Materials: $589.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $175.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $175.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $49.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $103.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $593.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4652692?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4652692?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9544657-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

95 Aquarius Drive, Kawaha Point, Rotorua 3010 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4652692 — Property damage

Q: What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4652692?

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 4652692. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning (Interior – End of Tenancy	$215.00	Cleaning (Interior – End of Tenancy
Rubbish Removal (Including Bin Cost	$593.00	Rubbish Removal (Including Bin Cost
Closet Door Replacement (Materials	$175.00	Closet Door Replacement (Materials
Bedroom Door Replacement (Materials	$175.00	Bedroom Door Replacement (Materials
Toilet Seat Replacement	$49.00	Toilet Seat Replacement
Kitchen Drawer Fascia Replacement	$103.00	Kitchen Drawer Fascia Replacement
Plastering Materials	$589.00	Plastering Materials
Application Filing Fee	$20.44	Application Filing Fee

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

Tinani Wilson, Okeroa Elizabeth Laukau and Faith Piata Laukau are to pay Quan Shu $1,919.44 immediately, calculated as follows: DescriptionLandlord Cleaning (Interior – End of Tenancy)$215.00 Rubbish Removal (Including Bin Cost)$593.00 Closet Door Replacement (Materials)$175.00 Bedroom Door Replacement (Materials)$175.00 Toilet Seat Replacement$49.00 Kitchen Drawer Fascia Replacement$103.00 Plastering Materials$589.00 Application Filing Fee$20.44 Total award$1,919.44

Reasons

The Landlord attended the hearing. The Tenant did not attend.

Previously, the Tribunal terminated the tenancy.

The Landlord also applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

The Landlord has presented the following invoice which forms the basis of its claim, alongside supporting photographs:

The Landlord’s evidence proceeds unchallenged.

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: s 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

The Tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The Landlord has provided photographs of the rubbish left behind and the unclean and untidy state of the premises. The Landlord claims $343.00 for rubbish removal and $250.00 for hiring bins to dispose of the rubbish, totalling: $593.00. The Landlord also claims $215.00 for a general clean of the interior of the premises.

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.

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: a. Closet door damaged with several holes (deliberate) b. Toilet seat cracked (careless) c. Damaged bedroom door replacement with holes and dents (deliberate) d. Damaged walls (holes – at least four) e. Damaged doors repair & re-attach f. Plastering materials g. Kitchen drawer repair (drawer fascia removed)

The Landlord has provided photographs of the damage. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The amounts ordered are proved and awarded above. I have not awarded the separate labour costs for door and walls repairs on the invoice as it is unclear how this differs from the repair items already included in the invoice for each damage item.

I have taken into account 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, I have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4652692. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning (Interior – End of Tenancy	$215.00	Cleaning (Interior – End of Tenancy
Rubbish Removal (Including Bin Cost	$593.00	Rubbish Removal (Including Bin Cost
Closet Door Replacement (Materials	$175.00	Closet Door Replacement (Materials
Bedroom Door Replacement (Materials	$175.00	Bedroom Door Replacement (Materials
Toilet Seat Replacement	$49.00	Toilet Seat Replacement
Kitchen Drawer Fascia Replacement	$103.00	Kitchen Drawer Fascia Replacement
Plastering Materials	$589.00	Plastering Materials
Application Filing Fee	$20.44	Application Filing Fee

Order

No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.
Tinani Wilson, Okeroa Elizabeth Laukau and Faith Piata Laukau are to pay Quan Shu $1,919.44 immediately, calculated as follows: DescriptionLandlord Cleaning (Interior – End of Tenancy)$215.00 Rubbish Removal (Including Bin Cost)$593.00 Closet Door Replacement (Materials)$175.00 Bedroom Door Replacement (Materials)$175.00 Toilet Seat Replacement$49.00 Kitchen Drawer Fascia Replacement$103.00 Plastering Materials$589.00 Application Filing Fee$20.44 Total award$1,919.44

Reasons

The Landlord attended the hearing. The Tenant did not attend.
Previously, the Tribunal terminated the tenancy.
The Landlord also applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The Landlord has presented the following invoice which forms the basis of its claim, alongside supporting photographs:
The Landlord’s evidence proceeds unchallenged.

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: s 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The Tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The Landlord has provided photographs of the rubbish left behind and the unclean and untidy state of the premises. The Landlord claims $343.00 for rubbish removal and $250.00 for hiring bins to dispose of the rubbish, totalling: $593.00. The Landlord also claims $215.00 for a general clean of the interior of the premises.

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.
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: a. Closet door damaged with several holes (deliberate) b. Toilet seat cracked (careless) c. Damaged bedroom door replacement with holes and dents (deliberate) d. Damaged walls (holes – at least four) e. Damaged doors repair & re-attach f. Plastering materials g. Kitchen drawer repair (drawer fascia removed)
The Landlord has provided photographs of the damage. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved and awarded above. I have not awarded the separate labour costs for door and walls repairs on the invoice as it is unclear how this differs from the repair items already included in the invoice for each damage item.
I have taken into account 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, I have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4652692 — Property damage at 95 Aquarius Drive, Kawaha Point, Rotorua 3010

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4652692 — Property damage at 95 Aquarius Drive, Kawaha Point, Rotorua 3010

At a glance

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

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