What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4654371?

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

How much money was awarded in case 4654371?

Cleaning: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Doors And Door Frame: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Kitchen Vinyl: $195.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4654371?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4654371?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9500571-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4654371?

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

How much money was awarded in case 4654371?

Cleaning: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Doors And Door Frame: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Kitchen Vinyl: $195.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4654371?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4654371?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9500571-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Room D, Unit/Flat 2, 11 Edgecumbe Street, Whitiora, Tenancy Tribunal Case 4654371 — Property damage

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4654371 — net $1,215.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Repairs: Doors and door frame	$500.00	Repairs: Doors and door frame
Repairs to walls in bedroom, wall heater plus unit clean including carpet and mattress clean	$500.00	Repairs to walls in bedroom, wall heater plus unit clean including carpet and mattress clean
Repairs: vinyl flooring kitchenette	$195.00	Repairs: vinyl flooring kitchenette
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,215.44
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,215.44

Order

No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.
Jubilee Kengike must pay Monarch Realty Limited T/A Harcourts Property Management as Agent for Steve Henshaw $1,215.44 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

Mr Herbert and Ms Davis appeared for the landlord. There was no appearance by the tenant.
The tenancy commenced on 12 May 2023 and was periodic. On 14 June 2023, the Tribunal terminated the tenancy for rent arrears of more than 21 days, awarded rent arrears, and ordered refund of the bond to the landlord, see NZTT 4558652. On 11 August 2023, the landlord filed a claim for compensation, damages, and reimbursement of the filing fee.
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”).
The property is a fully furnished single room studio apartment with bathroom and kitchenette. The property is in an apartment complex with a full kitchen shared among four other tenants.

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

The landlord claims that the tenant failed to leave the property in a reasonably clean condition, including the carpet and the mattress.
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 landlord has produced inspection reports for the property at the commencement and end of the tenancy, both including photographs. After considering those photographs and hearing from Mr Herbert, I am satisfied that the tenant failed to leave the property reasonably clean and remove all rubbish. Mr Herbert states that at one inspection the landlord discovered that the tenant had a puppy. At the end of the tenancy the landlord discovered that the mattresses had stains, which were not present at the commencement of the tenancy, and that the mattress smelt. Mr Herbert has also produced photographs of the carpet, which appears to be soiled. The carpet was not soiled at the commencement of the tenancy. The landlord had both the mattress and carpet professionally cleaned. I am satisfied that the tenant is liable.
Mr Herbert has produced invoices for cleaning ($201.25), carpet cleaning ($115.00), and mattress cleaning ($115.00).

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The landlord claims that the tenant is responsible for damage to walls, doors, vinyl flooring, the heater, and a shared wall in the hallway outside the tenant’s unit.
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 $500.00 per claim.
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 determining betterment and depreciation, the Tribunal must consider the age and condition of the items concerned at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Doors and door frame
Mr Herbert has produced photographs showing damage to a door in the kitchenette in the form of a large dent and the main door to the apartment, which has a large hole in it. The door frame is also damaged. There was no damage to these areas at the commencement of the tenancy. I am satisfied that this damage has occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. The tenant has not disproved liability for the damage The total cost of repair was $1,375.75. In this case, however, the landlord is claiming the insurance excess of $500.00. Walls in bedroom and wall heater.
Mr Herbert has produced photographs of walls in the bedroom which show damage in the form of two small holes and three areas of scraping. The main heater has been removed from its cavity in the wall and is damaged. After hearing from Mr Herbert and considering the other evidence, I am satisfied that this damage has occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. The tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The cost of repairing the walls was $532.60, and the heater $322.00. In this case, however, the landlord is claiming the insurance excess of $500.00 only.
Mr Herbert states that the costs associated with the cleaning and rubbish removal ($201.25), and cleaning of the carpet and mattress ($230.00) were included with the claim for damage to the walls in bedroom and wall heater and covered by the insurance excess. Vinyl flooring
There is a small gouge in the vinyl flooring in the kitchenette. This occurred during the tenancy. After hearing from Mr Herbert and considering the photographs, I accept the submission that it is likely more than fair wear and tear and likely the result of a careless act. I award the cost of patching the damaged area which was $195.00.
I make no deduction for depreciation or betterment. The property is less than three years old and was in a good condition at the commencement of the tenancy. Damage to wall the hallway.
During the tenancy, a property manager acting for the landlord discovered damage to a wall in the hallway outside the tenant’s property. Mr Herbert states that the tenant admitted to the property manager that they were responsible for the damage. The landlord issued a 14-day notice, which was not remedied. The landlord arranged for the damage to be repaired at a cost of $95.00. There are no photographs of the area, before or in its damaged state. The wall concerned is shared with other tenants. There is no evidence from the property manager concerned. There has been nothing produced confirming that the tenant accepts liability. There is insufficient evidence to prove this claim. Costs
Because Monarch Realty Limited T/A Harcourts Property Management as Agent for Steve Henshaw has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. Name suppression
Although they have been substantially successful and entitled to do so the landlord does not seek name suppression.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4654371 — net $1,215.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Repairs: Doors and door frame	$500.00	Repairs: Doors and door frame
Repairs to walls in bedroom, wall heater plus unit clean including carpet and mattress clean	$500.00	Repairs to walls in bedroom, wall heater plus unit clean including carpet and mattress clean
Repairs: vinyl flooring kitchenette	$195.00	Repairs: vinyl flooring kitchenette
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,215.44
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,215.44

Order

No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.
Jubilee Kengike must pay Monarch Realty Limited T/A Harcourts Property Management as Agent for Steve Henshaw $1,215.44 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

Mr Herbert and Ms Davis appeared for the landlord. There was no appearance by the tenant.
The tenancy commenced on 12 May 2023 and was periodic. On 14 June 2023, the Tribunal terminated the tenancy for rent arrears of more than 21 days, awarded rent arrears, and ordered refund of the bond to the landlord, see NZTT 4558652. On 11 August 2023, the landlord filed a claim for compensation, damages, and reimbursement of the filing fee.
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”).
The property is a fully furnished single room studio apartment with bathroom and kitchenette. The property is in an apartment complex with a full kitchen shared among four other tenants.

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

The landlord claims that the tenant failed to leave the property in a reasonably clean condition, including the carpet and the mattress.
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 landlord has produced inspection reports for the property at the commencement and end of the tenancy, both including photographs. After considering those photographs and hearing from Mr Herbert, I am satisfied that the tenant failed to leave the property reasonably clean and remove all rubbish. Mr Herbert states that at one inspection the landlord discovered that the tenant had a puppy. At the end of the tenancy the landlord discovered that the mattresses had stains, which were not present at the commencement of the tenancy, and that the mattress smelt. Mr Herbert has also produced photographs of the carpet, which appears to be soiled. The carpet was not soiled at the commencement of the tenancy. The landlord had both the mattress and carpet professionally cleaned. I am satisfied that the tenant is liable.
Mr Herbert has produced invoices for cleaning ($201.25), carpet cleaning ($115.00), and mattress cleaning ($115.00).

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The landlord claims that the tenant is responsible for damage to walls, doors, vinyl flooring, the heater, and a shared wall in the hallway outside the tenant’s unit.
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 $500.00 per claim.
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 determining betterment and depreciation, the Tribunal must consider the age and condition of the items concerned at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Doors and door frame
Mr Herbert has produced photographs showing damage to a door in the kitchenette in the form of a large dent and the main door to the apartment, which has a large hole in it. The door frame is also damaged. There was no damage to these areas at the commencement of the tenancy. I am satisfied that this damage has occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. The tenant has not disproved liability for the damage The total cost of repair was $1,375.75. In this case, however, the landlord is claiming the insurance excess of $500.00. Walls in bedroom and wall heater.
Mr Herbert has produced photographs of walls in the bedroom which show damage in the form of two small holes and three areas of scraping. The main heater has been removed from its cavity in the wall and is damaged. After hearing from Mr Herbert and considering the other evidence, I am satisfied that this damage has occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. The tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The cost of repairing the walls was $532.60, and the heater $322.00. In this case, however, the landlord is claiming the insurance excess of $500.00 only.
Mr Herbert states that the costs associated with the cleaning and rubbish removal ($201.25), and cleaning of the carpet and mattress ($230.00) were included with the claim for damage to the walls in bedroom and wall heater and covered by the insurance excess. Vinyl flooring
There is a small gouge in the vinyl flooring in the kitchenette. This occurred during the tenancy. After hearing from Mr Herbert and considering the photographs, I accept the submission that it is likely more than fair wear and tear and likely the result of a careless act. I award the cost of patching the damaged area which was $195.00.
I make no deduction for depreciation or betterment. The property is less than three years old and was in a good condition at the commencement of the tenancy. Damage to wall the hallway.
During the tenancy, a property manager acting for the landlord discovered damage to a wall in the hallway outside the tenant’s property. Mr Herbert states that the tenant admitted to the property manager that they were responsible for the damage. The landlord issued a 14-day notice, which was not remedied. The landlord arranged for the damage to be repaired at a cost of $95.00. There are no photographs of the area, before or in its damaged state. The wall concerned is shared with other tenants. There is no evidence from the property manager concerned. There has been nothing produced confirming that the tenant accepts liability. There is insufficient evidence to prove this claim. Costs
Because Monarch Realty Limited T/A Harcourts Property Management as Agent for Steve Henshaw has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. Name suppression
Although they have been substantially successful and entitled to do so the landlord does not seek name suppression.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4654371 — Property damage at Room D, Unit/Flat 2, 11 Edgecumbe Street, Whitiora,

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4654371 — Property damage at Room D, Unit/Flat 2, 11 Edgecumbe Street, Whitiora,

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