How much money was awarded in case 4664769?

Break Fixed Term Tenancy Early Costs: $422.12 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,160.72 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $698.51 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4664769?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4664769?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9776995-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 4664769?

Break Fixed Term Tenancy Early Costs: $422.12 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,160.72 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $698.51 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4664769?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4664769?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9776995-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4664769 — Rent arrears

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4664769 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

Tenantcheck Insights

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4664769 — net $2,301.79 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 22/06/2023	$1,160.72	Rent arrears to 22/06/2023
Break fixed term tenancy early costs	$422.12	Break fixed term tenancy early costs
Repairs: (broken window latch and wall damage	$698.51	Repairs: (broken window latch and wall damage
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,301.79
Bond	$2,500.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,301.79

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.

Esteban Diaz and Yoselyn Riquelme must pay the landlord $2,301.79 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,500.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: The landlord: $2,301.79 Esteban Diaz and Yoselyn Riquelme: $198.21

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

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?

The tenant was introduced to the landlord company by the immigration agency that defrauded him.

The tenant entered a fixed term tenancy from 10 January 2023 to 10 January 2024. He was the victim of fraud by an immigration agency that did not obtain a work visa for him as instructed and agreed. As a result, he reported the fraud to Immigration New Zealand and the New Zealand Police that began an investigation into his claims. In retaliation, a person from the immigration agency tried to enter the tenant’s home unlawfully by following another person that entered the building. This breach of the tenant’s quiet enjoyment of his home frightened the tenant, his wife, and his children and led to him requesting to break the lease early so he and his family could move to another property that the immigration agency had no connection too.

The tenant moved out of the premises on 16 May 2023. The landlord took all reasonably practicable steps to find a new tenant to take over the lease. A new tenant moved into the premises on 26 June 2023. Therefore, the tenancy ended on 26 June 2023. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.

As a result of the tenant breaking the fixed term tenancy early, the landlord took steps to mitigate the tenant’s losses and its losses by advertising for a new tenant to take over the lease. The costs of finding the new tenant have been passed on to the tenant as an early break lease fee. These costs are reasonable in the circumstances and have been proven by the landlord.

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. There was a significant yellow stain on the wall of the lounge that looked like someone had tried to cover a mark or stain and made it worse. The pre-tenancy photograph taken on 9 January 2023 shows that the stain was not on the wall at the time the tenancy commenced but was there on 30 May 2023 when the exit inspection was carried out; b. There were two window latches that had the flaps broken which stopped the latches from sealing properly. These latches were new 4 January 2023 when all the window latches were replaced prior to the property being tenanted.

The tenant claims he never received a copy of the pre-tenancy inspection report and was not present when the exit inspection was carried out. He denies that the damage occurred during the tenancy but had no evidence to disprove the landlord’s claim other than he was not present when the landlord carried out the exit inspection as he had been in Queenstown on move out date.

The landlord claims that the tenant did receive a copy of the pre-tenancy inspection report and produced a photograph of the wall in question on 9 January 2023 that is time and date stamped. The landlord also produced a copy of an invoice dated 4 January 2023 that clearly shows a contractor replaced all ten window latches prior to the tenancy commencing. No one entered the premises between 16 May 2023, when the tenant moved out, and 30 May 2023 when the exit inspection was done. The landlord has proven the damage occurred during the tenancy.

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

The amounts ordered 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.

Because the landlord has wholly succeeded with the claim, I must reimburse the filing fee.

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4664769 — net $2,301.79 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 22/06/2023	$1,160.72	Rent arrears to 22/06/2023
Break fixed term tenancy early costs	$422.12	Break fixed term tenancy early costs
Repairs: (broken window latch and wall damage	$698.51	Repairs: (broken window latch and wall damage
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,301.79
Bond	$2,500.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,301.79

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.

Esteban Diaz and Yoselyn Riquelme must pay the landlord $2,301.79 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,500.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: The landlord: $2,301.79 Esteban Diaz and Yoselyn Riquelme: $198.21

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

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?

The tenant was introduced to the landlord company by the immigration agency that defrauded him.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

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

The amounts ordered are proved.

Because the landlord has wholly succeeded with the claim, I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4664769 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4664769 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions