What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4655389 about?

The tribunal order states: The claim for contamination is withdrawn.

How much money was awarded in case 4655389?

Cleaning: $209.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $250.00 awarded to landlord; Piece Of Art Removed By Tenant: $50.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $400.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $150.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $65.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $400.00 awarded to landlord; To The Door Step: $50.60 awarded to landlord; To Two Walls: $414.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $429.45 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4655389?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4655389?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9821773-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4655389 about?

The tribunal order states: The claim for contamination is withdrawn.

How much money was awarded in case 4655389?

Cleaning: $209.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $250.00 awarded to landlord; Piece Of Art Removed By Tenant: $50.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $400.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $150.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $65.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $400.00 awarded to landlord; To The Door Step: $50.60 awarded to landlord; To Two Walls: $414.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $429.45 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4655389?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4655389?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9821773-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4655389 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4655389 — Property damage | TenantCheck

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4655389 — net $2,438.49 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Piece of art removed by tenant	$50.00	Piece of art removed by tenant
Insurance excess for the wooden floors	$400.00	Insurance excess for the wooden floors
Repairs: to the door step	$50.60	Repairs: to the door step
To repair damaged lawn, sow new seed	$150.00	To repair damaged lawn, sow new seed
Rubbish removal: skip	$429.45	Rubbish removal: skip
Lock/key replacement: only one key returned	$250.00	Lock/key replacement: only one key returned
Replacement letter box - key missing	$65.00	Replacement letter box - key missing
Insurance excess for the laundry floor	$400.00	Insurance excess for the laundry floor
Repairs: to two walls	$414.00	Repairs: to two walls
Carpet cleaning	$209.00	Carpet cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,438.49
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,438.49

Claims and awards for application 4655389 — net $2,438.49 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Piece of art removed by tenant

Amount: $50.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Piece of art removed by tenant

Insurance excess for the wooden floors

Amount: $400.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Insurance excess for the wooden floors

Repairs: to the door step

Amount: $50.60
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: to the door step

To repair damaged lawn, sow new seed

Amount: $150.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: To repair damaged lawn, sow new seed

Rubbish removal: skip

Amount: $429.45
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal: skip

Dismissed claims

Other Claims — All other claims dismissed

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Carpet Cleaning Filing Fee Property damage Rubbish Removal

Order

The claim for contamination is withdrawn.
Caitlin Joan Harley must pay [The landlord/s] $2,438.49 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

The landlord was represented by one of the owners. The tenant was notified about the hearing.
The bond was refunded to the tenant after the end of the tenancy, less a small amount agreed for cleaning. The landlord subsequently identified the need for more cleaning and damage. I find the landlord is allowed to bring this claim.
The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

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 (RTA).
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy because she did not remove the rubbish.
The landlord has proved the claim for carpet cleaning.
The amounts ordered are proved.
The tenant did not return all the keys. The landlord said the tenant was given three full sets of keys at the start of the tenancy and only one key was returned. This meant replacement keys were required. The loss of the letterbox key meant a replacement letterbox because this is not a key locksmiths sell. These claims are proved and allowed.
A piece of art was removed by the tenant at the end of the tenancy. I have seen emails between the parties where the tenant said she thinks someone removed the art by accident. The claim is for $500 but I have only allowed a token amount. While I accept there has been loss to the landlord, she has not proved the original art by an up and coming artist is worth $500.
The claim for curtain cleaning is not proved because the landlord did not have photos showing the mould, or a receipt. This claim is dismissed.
The landlord claimed the cost of replacement plants. This claim is not proved because there is insufficient evidence about the garden at the start of the tenancy.

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 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. See section 49B(3)(a) 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 landlord has proved there was damage to two walls and to the outside step and door frame. Repairs are required. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord has provided me with information from her insurer and I accept there was damage to the floorboards and to the laundry floor during the tenancy. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The insurance excess is claimed. I find the excess is less than the equivalent of four weeks in rent. The claims are proved and allowed.
The landlord has claimed the cost of repairing the lawn. I have been provided with photos showing the condition of the lawn before the start of the tenancy and the condition of the lawn at the end of the tenancy. I am persuaded the lawn needed resowing because of the bare patches and the holes. I have allowed an amount that seems reasonable to me. Other orders
Because the landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.
The landlord’s application for suppression is allowed because the landlord is the most successful party.

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4655389 — net $2,438.49 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Piece of art removed by tenant	$50.00	Piece of art removed by tenant
Insurance excess for the wooden floors	$400.00	Insurance excess for the wooden floors
Repairs: to the door step	$50.60	Repairs: to the door step
To repair damaged lawn, sow new seed	$150.00	To repair damaged lawn, sow new seed
Rubbish removal: skip	$429.45	Rubbish removal: skip
Lock/key replacement: only one key returned	$250.00	Lock/key replacement: only one key returned
Replacement letter box - key missing	$65.00	Replacement letter box - key missing
Insurance excess for the laundry floor	$400.00	Insurance excess for the laundry floor
Repairs: to two walls	$414.00	Repairs: to two walls
Carpet cleaning	$209.00	Carpet cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,438.49
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,438.49

Claims and awards for application 4655389 — net $2,438.49 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Piece of art removed by tenant

Amount: $50.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Piece of art removed by tenant

Insurance excess for the wooden floors

Amount: $400.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Insurance excess for the wooden floors

Repairs: to the door step

Amount: $50.60
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: to the door step

To repair damaged lawn, sow new seed

Amount: $150.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: To repair damaged lawn, sow new seed

Rubbish removal: skip

Amount: $429.45
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal: skip

Dismissed claims

Other Claims — All other claims dismissed

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Carpet Cleaning Filing Fee Property damage Rubbish Removal

Order

The claim for contamination is withdrawn.
Caitlin Joan Harley must pay [The landlord/s] $2,438.49 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

The landlord was represented by one of the owners. The tenant was notified about the hearing.
The bond was refunded to the tenant after the end of the tenancy, less a small amount agreed for cleaning. The landlord subsequently identified the need for more cleaning and damage. I find the landlord is allowed to bring this claim.
The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

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 (RTA).
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy because she did not remove the rubbish.
The landlord has proved the claim for carpet cleaning.
The amounts ordered are proved.
The tenant did not return all the keys. The landlord said the tenant was given three full sets of keys at the start of the tenancy and only one key was returned. This meant replacement keys were required. The loss of the letterbox key meant a replacement letterbox because this is not a key locksmiths sell. These claims are proved and allowed.
A piece of art was removed by the tenant at the end of the tenancy. I have seen emails between the parties where the tenant said she thinks someone removed the art by accident. The claim is for $500 but I have only allowed a token amount. While I accept there has been loss to the landlord, she has not proved the original art by an up and coming artist is worth $500.
The claim for curtain cleaning is not proved because the landlord did not have photos showing the mould, or a receipt. This claim is dismissed.
The landlord claimed the cost of replacement plants. This claim is not proved because there is insufficient evidence about the garden at the start of the tenancy.

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 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. See section 49B(3)(a) 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 landlord has proved there was damage to two walls and to the outside step and door frame. Repairs are required. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord has provided me with information from her insurer and I accept there was damage to the floorboards and to the laundry floor during the tenancy. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The insurance excess is claimed. I find the excess is less than the equivalent of four weeks in rent. The claims are proved and allowed.
The landlord has claimed the cost of repairing the lawn. I have been provided with photos showing the condition of the lawn before the start of the tenancy and the condition of the lawn at the end of the tenancy. I am persuaded the lawn needed resowing because of the bare patches and the holes. I have allowed an amount that seems reasonable to me. Other orders
Because the landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.
The landlord’s application for suppression is allowed because the landlord is the most successful party.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4655389 — Property damage

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4655389 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

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

Dismissed claims

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