What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4655051 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenants must pay the landlord $3,349.44 immediately, calculated as shown

How much money was awarded in case 4655051?

Cleaning: $380.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $450.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $529.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $800.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,170.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4655051?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4655051?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9668829-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4655051 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenants must pay the landlord $3,349.44 immediately, calculated as shown

How much money was awarded in case 4655051?

Cleaning: $380.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $450.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $529.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $800.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,170.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4655051?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4655051?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9668829-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4655051 — Cleanliness

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4655051 — net $3,349.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Lock/key replacement (3 locks	$529.00	Lock/key replacement (3 locks
Carpet Cleaning (3 bedroom house	$380.00	Carpet Cleaning (3 bedroom house
Cleaning	$450.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal: (3 x 7-9 cubic metre skips based on a	$1,170.00	Rubbish removal: (3 x 7-9 cubic metre skips based on a
Rubbish removal: ( per hour for 2 persons x 8 hours	$800.00	Rubbish removal: ( per hour for 2 persons x 8 hours
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,349.44
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,349.44

Both parties attended the hearing.

The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Suppression

Section 95A RTA states regarding suppression orders that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.

The landlord requested suppression for the tenants as well as itself in its application. This is because the tenants have ended up in unforeseen and unfortunate circumstances that led them to be before the Tribunal. The Landlord felt they should not be penalised further.

I have granted name suppression to the tenants because I consider it is justified because of the circumstances of the case.

I have granted made suppression for the landlord as it has been wholly successful in this order.

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 tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.

The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish because of being evicted, being in emergency housing, having no funds to have the rubbish removed and no place to store any of the items that could be sold to repay some of the monies owing to the landlord. The landlord has chosen to dispose of items, such as a washing machine and fridge, that could have been sold by it to offset the monies it is owed by the tenants. In addition, the landlord has made inflated claims for rubbish removal and skip bin hire. As such, the amounts claimed have been reduced accordingly.

The tenant did not return the keys until the eviction order was being enforced. The amount claimed by the landlord was more than what was paid to get three locks replaced/re-barrelled. The amount awarded has been reduced accordingly.

The amounts ordered are proved.

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.

On examination of the evidence presented, I find that the premises are old and were not provided and maintained in a reasonable state of repair having regard to the age and character of the premises and the period during which the premises were made available to the tenants for residential purposes. The tenants gave evidence that they did not complaint about the state of disrepair of the premises even though what the evidence shows, were clear breaches of the landlord’s obligations pursuant to s45(1)(b) of the RTA. The tenants gave evidence that because they are receiving support from Work and Income New Zealand, and the rental accommodation that they can afford often does not comply with a landlord’s statutory obligations, they did not complain unless something was making the house uninhabitable. In addition, when one of the tenants did try to raise some of the landlord’s s45(1)(b) breaches with the previous property manager, he made inappropriate comments that made her feel unsafe and threatened. She stopped raising issues with him as a result and tried to actively avoid all unnecessary contact with him.

The landlord made a claim for $350.00 for fixing a broken shower that, on examination of the evidence before me, was not a result of the careless use or deliberate/intentional acts by the tenant. The damage to the shower head was because of fair wear and tear given the age and state of the shower head at the commencement of the tenancy. The tenant has successfully disproved liability for the damage, and I decline to order the amount claimed.

The landlord made a claim for $250.00 to reconnect power to the premises when the power was in the owner’s name and was not able to be disconnected by the tenants. In addition, the tenant has proven that the power was still on in the premises at the time she was evicted, and she did not seek to have the power disconnected as she was aware the power was in the owner’s name and that she had no authority on the account. The tenant has successfully disproved liability for the damage, and I decline to order the amount claimed

The landlord made a claim for $450.00 for fixing peeling wallpaper that the tenant has provided evidence was already in a poor state of repair when her tenancy commenced. The wallpaper looks to me to be at least 40 or more years old, has been peeling off in places all over the house and needed replacement even at the commencement of the tenancy. The tenant has successfully disproved liability for the damage, and I decline to order the amount claimed

Because the landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4655051 — net $3,349.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Lock/key replacement (3 locks	$529.00	Lock/key replacement (3 locks
Carpet Cleaning (3 bedroom house	$380.00	Carpet Cleaning (3 bedroom house
Cleaning	$450.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal: (3 x 7-9 cubic metre skips based on a	$1,170.00	Rubbish removal: (3 x 7-9 cubic metre skips based on a
Rubbish removal: ( per hour for 2 persons x 8 hours	$800.00	Rubbish removal: ( per hour for 2 persons x 8 hours
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,349.44
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,349.44

Both parties attended the hearing.

The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Suppression

I have granted name suppression to the tenants because I consider it is justified because of the circumstances of the case.

I have granted made suppression for the landlord as it has been wholly successful in this order.

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

The amounts ordered are proved.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Because the landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4655051 — Cleanliness

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4655051 — 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