What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4659672 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 4659672?

Cleaning: $800.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $827.14 awarded to landlord; 2x Kitchen Power Points Replaced: $206.75 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $409.78 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $965.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $224.85 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4659672?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4659672?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10754327-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4659672 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 4659672?

Cleaning: $800.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $827.14 awarded to landlord; 2x Kitchen Power Points Replaced: $206.75 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $409.78 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $965.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $224.85 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4659672?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4659672?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10754327-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4659672 — Property damage

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4659672 — net $3,453.96 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears 9to 14/08/23	$827.14	Rent arrears 9to 14/08/23
Water rates: July/August 2023	$224.85	4. During the hearing, the tenant accepted he owed the amount of rent and water rates arrears claimed by the landlord.
Repairs: Wall damage plaster/sand and paint	$965.00	Repairs: Wall damage plaster/sand and paint
Cleaning	$800.00	Cleaning
Repairs: Door glass replacement	$409.78	Repairs: Door glass replacement
Repairs: 2x kitchen power points replaced	$206.75	Repairs: 2x kitchen power points replaced
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,453.96
Bond	$3,700.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,453.96

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name and identifying details.
Stephanie Lee Price and Richard Robert Kirby to pay [the landlord] $3,453.96 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,700.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: [The landlord]: $3,453.96 Stephanie Lee Price and Richard Robert Kirby: $246.04

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 26 August 2023.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

The tenancy ended on 14 August 2023. The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.
During the hearing, the tenant accepted he owed the amount of rent and water rates arrears claimed by the landlord.

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 landlord says the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, did not leave the yard clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
The landlord did not provide the Tribunal with an entry and inspection report and photographs. It did provide an entry video and some undated exit photographs of general damage it sought compensation for.
The tenant successfully disproved the landlord’s claim for $190.00 for removing a garden box, compost bin, removal of old tiles, carpet, paint and grass reseeding. The entry video clearly showed all of these alleged rubbish items were in the property at the start of the tenancy. The tenant also proved the grass area that needed reseeding was damaged during the January/February 2023 floods but accepts he did not alert the landlord to this at the time of the flooding. He says the landlord was informed of this damage during one of the property inspections post February 2023. The tenant did not accept the pot on the berm was his. There was no evidence the pot had belonged to him, and it was left in a public area.
The tenant says he had the house cleaned on exit but did not have the invoice to prove his claim.
I am satisfied based on the entry video and the exit photographs that the premise was not left in a reasonably clean and tidy state and that the oven, range hood, draws, mould on window ledges, cupboards, fly spots, shower doors, carpet stains and cobwebs needed cleaning. I do not accept the tenant was responsible for cleaning the insides of light fittings or for dustings the garage door railing. I have discounted the $850.00 compensation sought by the landlord to $800.00 in recognition of the items I consider the tenant should not be responsible for cleaning.
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.
The following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. The walls throughout the house had holes from where the tenant had screwed screws, nails and picture hooks into the walls. Many of these holes had been plastered and skim painted, but not sanded and finished off to a ready to paint standard; b. There were scuff marks on the corner of a wall in the hallway and a chip out of a door; c. The shower head had a screw in it and needed to be replaced; d. The glass in a door needed to be replaced as it was broken from something hitting it; and e. Two power points in the kitchen needed to be replaced.
The landlord says this damage is more than fair wear and tear. Walls
The landlord also suggested the whole house had been repainted before the tenancy commenced. The entry video shows that is not correct as several bedrooms clearly have black marks on the walls. In addition, the video shows that new curtains have been installed. The tenant says there were holes above these windows from the old curtains and the tenant says he had these plastered along with the holes he accepts he made by hanging things on walls.
The tenant provided an invoice for $1,640.00 that proved he had a door replaced, that had been damaged, and new hinges installed. This invoice shows the tenant had the holes he had made, in the lounge and upstairs rooms, plastered and skim painted. He stated further that the owner had told him he was going to renovate the house when the tenant moved out and that he was a painter, so if the tenant plastered the walls, he would paint them. The property manager was unaware of this alleged conversation and the tenant had nothing in writing.
The landlord produced a 14-day notice dated 6 March 2019, that records the amount of damage the tenant had caused by putting things up on walls and agreement was recorded in that notice that the damage would be remediated by the tenant at the end of the tenancy.
I am satisfied the scuff marks on the corner of a wall in the hallway and the chip out of a door were accidental damage or fair wear and tear.
I am also satisfied the tenant caused careless damage to some of the walls by hanging items on the walls with screws, nails and picture hooks and that these left holes in the walls when they were removed. The tenant did hire a professional painter to plaster over these holes but did not pay for the plaster to be sanded and prepared for touch painting.
I do not accept the tenant is liable for the holes above windows where the old curtains had been hung and that were plastered by his contractor.
The landlord confirmed it had made an insurance claim for the wall damage and that its excess was one week’s rent. I am satisfied the tenant caused some of the damage the landlord was claiming for but not all of it. Many of the smaller holes that had been plastered look like they could have been spot painted. I am not satisfied the tenant should be held liable for the wall repairs and a full repaint of the house at a cost of $7,360.00.
I find the tenant has caused some careless damage, by putting things up on walls using nails and screws and picture hooks, and that he should be held liable for $965.00 for the sanding and spot painting of these areas.
I dismiss the remainder of the landlord’s claim for repainting costs, as there is evidence there were some marks already on the bedroom walls, that there was some damage from the change in curtains that he was not responsible for repairing and there was some fair wear and tear on some corners of walls and doors.
The $965.00 awarded is the equivalent to the excess the landlord claims it will have to pay if its insurance claim is accepted. The tenant has disproved liability for some of the wall damage, as such I consider this quantum to be fair and reasonable in all the circumstances. Door glass
The tenant accepted liability for the door glass repair. He says a piece of debris hit the door, during the February 2023 storm, but accepted he did not take a photograph of the damage to prove when it occurred and he confirmed he had never reported the damage to the landlord. The $409.78 claimed by the tenant to repair this door glass is awarded to it. Shower head
The tenant says the shower head in his daughter’s bathroom fell apart a few weeks before the end of the tenancy and he screwed it back together until he could purchase a need one. He accepts he did not inform the landlord of this at the time he discovered the showerhead was broken.
I am satisfied from the evidence that the showerhead was not new and that it broke due to fair wear and tear and not because of intentional or careless damage.
I dismiss the landlord’s claim for $53.98 compensation, for lack of proof the tenant’s careless acts or omissions caused the damage to the shower head. Power points in kitchen
The tenant accepted liability for the two power points that were damaged in the kitchen. He says these were damaged when the fridge was moved out.
I award the landlord $206.75 compensation to cover the cost it incurred replacing these power points. General comments
All the amounts ordered in the vacated damage claims above are proved.
I have considered 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 considered the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Reimbursement of filing fee
Because [the applicant] has substantially succeeded with the claim, I have reimbursed the filing fee. Refer to section 102(4) of the RTA. Name suppression
The landlord applies for non-publication of its name and identifying details.
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 has substantially succeeded in its proceedings. I do not consider publication is in the public interest or justified because of the landlord’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
Non-publication is ordered.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4659672 — net $3,453.96 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears 9to 14/08/23	$827.14	Rent arrears 9to 14/08/23
Water rates: July/August 2023	$224.85	4. During the hearing, the tenant accepted he owed the amount of rent and water rates arrears claimed by the landlord.
Repairs: Wall damage plaster/sand and paint	$965.00	Repairs: Wall damage plaster/sand and paint
Cleaning	$800.00	Cleaning
Repairs: Door glass replacement	$409.78	Repairs: Door glass replacement
Repairs: 2x kitchen power points replaced	$206.75	Repairs: 2x kitchen power points replaced
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,453.96
Bond	$3,700.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,453.96

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name and identifying details.
Stephanie Lee Price and Richard Robert Kirby to pay [the landlord] $3,453.96 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,700.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: [The landlord]: $3,453.96 Stephanie Lee Price and Richard Robert Kirby: $246.04

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 26 August 2023.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

The tenancy ended on 14 August 2023. The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.
During the hearing, the tenant accepted he owed the amount of rent and water rates arrears claimed by the landlord.

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 landlord says the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, did not leave the yard clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
The landlord did not provide the Tribunal with an entry and inspection report and photographs. It did provide an entry video and some undated exit photographs of general damage it sought compensation for.
The tenant successfully disproved the landlord’s claim for $190.00 for removing a garden box, compost bin, removal of old tiles, carpet, paint and grass reseeding. The entry video clearly showed all of these alleged rubbish items were in the property at the start of the tenancy. The tenant also proved the grass area that needed reseeding was damaged during the January/February 2023 floods but accepts he did not alert the landlord to this at the time of the flooding. He says the landlord was informed of this damage during one of the property inspections post February 2023. The tenant did not accept the pot on the berm was his. There was no evidence the pot had belonged to him, and it was left in a public area.
The tenant says he had the house cleaned on exit but did not have the invoice to prove his claim.
I am satisfied based on the entry video and the exit photographs that the premise was not left in a reasonably clean and tidy state and that the oven, range hood, draws, mould on window ledges, cupboards, fly spots, shower doors, carpet stains and cobwebs needed cleaning. I do not accept the tenant was responsible for cleaning the insides of light fittings or for dustings the garage door railing. I have discounted the $850.00 compensation sought by the landlord to $800.00 in recognition of the items I consider the tenant should not be responsible for cleaning.
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.
The following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. The walls throughout the house had holes from where the tenant had screwed screws, nails and picture hooks into the walls. Many of these holes had been plastered and skim painted, but not sanded and finished off to a ready to paint standard; b. There were scuff marks on the corner of a wall in the hallway and a chip out of a door; c. The shower head had a screw in it and needed to be replaced; d. The glass in a door needed to be replaced as it was broken from something hitting it; and e. Two power points in the kitchen needed to be replaced.
The landlord says this damage is more than fair wear and tear. Walls
The landlord also suggested the whole house had been repainted before the tenancy commenced. The entry video shows that is not correct as several bedrooms clearly have black marks on the walls. In addition, the video shows that new curtains have been installed. The tenant says there were holes above these windows from the old curtains and the tenant says he had these plastered along with the holes he accepts he made by hanging things on walls.
The tenant provided an invoice for $1,640.00 that proved he had a door replaced, that had been damaged, and new hinges installed. This invoice shows the tenant had the holes he had made, in the lounge and upstairs rooms, plastered and skim painted. He stated further that the owner had told him he was going to renovate the house when the tenant moved out and that he was a painter, so if the tenant plastered the walls, he would paint them. The property manager was unaware of this alleged conversation and the tenant had nothing in writing.
The landlord produced a 14-day notice dated 6 March 2019, that records the amount of damage the tenant had caused by putting things up on walls and agreement was recorded in that notice that the damage would be remediated by the tenant at the end of the tenancy.
I am satisfied the scuff marks on the corner of a wall in the hallway and the chip out of a door were accidental damage or fair wear and tear.
I am also satisfied the tenant caused careless damage to some of the walls by hanging items on the walls with screws, nails and picture hooks and that these left holes in the walls when they were removed. The tenant did hire a professional painter to plaster over these holes but did not pay for the plaster to be sanded and prepared for touch painting.
I do not accept the tenant is liable for the holes above windows where the old curtains had been hung and that were plastered by his contractor.
The landlord confirmed it had made an insurance claim for the wall damage and that its excess was one week’s rent. I am satisfied the tenant caused some of the damage the landlord was claiming for but not all of it. Many of the smaller holes that had been plastered look like they could have been spot painted. I am not satisfied the tenant should be held liable for the wall repairs and a full repaint of the house at a cost of $7,360.00.
I find the tenant has caused some careless damage, by putting things up on walls using nails and screws and picture hooks, and that he should be held liable for $965.00 for the sanding and spot painting of these areas.
I dismiss the remainder of the landlord’s claim for repainting costs, as there is evidence there were some marks already on the bedroom walls, that there was some damage from the change in curtains that he was not responsible for repairing and there was some fair wear and tear on some corners of walls and doors.
The $965.00 awarded is the equivalent to the excess the landlord claims it will have to pay if its insurance claim is accepted. The tenant has disproved liability for some of the wall damage, as such I consider this quantum to be fair and reasonable in all the circumstances. Door glass
The tenant accepted liability for the door glass repair. He says a piece of debris hit the door, during the February 2023 storm, but accepted he did not take a photograph of the damage to prove when it occurred and he confirmed he had never reported the damage to the landlord. The $409.78 claimed by the tenant to repair this door glass is awarded to it. Shower head
The tenant says the shower head in his daughter’s bathroom fell apart a few weeks before the end of the tenancy and he screwed it back together until he could purchase a need one. He accepts he did not inform the landlord of this at the time he discovered the showerhead was broken.
I am satisfied from the evidence that the showerhead was not new and that it broke due to fair wear and tear and not because of intentional or careless damage.
I dismiss the landlord’s claim for $53.98 compensation, for lack of proof the tenant’s careless acts or omissions caused the damage to the shower head. Power points in kitchen
The tenant accepted liability for the two power points that were damaged in the kitchen. He says these were damaged when the fridge was moved out.
I award the landlord $206.75 compensation to cover the cost it incurred replacing these power points. General comments
All the amounts ordered in the vacated damage claims above are proved.
I have considered 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 considered the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Reimbursement of filing fee
Because [the applicant] has substantially succeeded with the claim, I have reimbursed the filing fee. Refer to section 102(4) of the RTA. Name suppression
The landlord applies for non-publication of its name and identifying details.
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 has substantially succeeded in its proceedings. I do not consider publication is in the public interest or justified because of the landlord’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
Non-publication is ordered.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4659672 — Property damage

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4659672 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

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

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

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