What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4674752 about?

The tribunal order states: The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,600.00 ([Bond number suppressed])

How much money was awarded in case 4674752?

Cleaning: $310.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $320.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $80.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $4,500.00 awarded to landlord; 10 Holes: $2,300.00 awarded to landlord; Electrics: $133.40 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Blinds: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Letterbox: $60.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Rubbish Bin: $69.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $780.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,200.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4674752?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4674752?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9574371-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4674752 about?

The tribunal order states: The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,600.00 ([Bond number suppressed])

How much money was awarded in case 4674752?

Cleaning: $310.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $320.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $80.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $4,500.00 awarded to landlord; 10 Holes: $2,300.00 awarded to landlord; Electrics: $133.40 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Blinds: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Letterbox: $60.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Rubbish Bin: $69.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $780.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,200.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4674752?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4674752?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9574371-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

3 Queenwood Avenue, Queenwood, Hamilton 3210 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4674752 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4674752 — net $6,372.84 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 25/9/23	$4,500.00	Rent arrears to 25/9/23
Replace furnishings: letterbox	$60.00	Replace furnishings: letterbox
Replace furnishings: rubbish bin	$69.00	Replace furnishings: rubbish bin
Lawns and Garden work	$80.00	Lawns and Garden work
Carpet Cleaning	$310.00	Carpet Cleaning
Cleaning	$320.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$780.00	Rubbish removal
Repairs: electrics	$133.40	Repairs: electrics
Replace furnishings: blinds	$200.00	Replace furnishings: blinds
Window repairs: 3 window replacements	$1,200.00	Window repairs: 3 window replacements
Repairs: 10 holes	$2,300.00	Repairs: 10 holes
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$6,372.84
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$6,372.84

Order

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,600.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.
Carol Te Hapa Awhitu must pay [The landlord/s] $6,372.84 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

The landlord attended this remote teleconference hearing represented by [redacted] however none of the calls made to the number provided for the tenant at the allocated hearing time were answered. The Tribunal may hear matters in the absence of a party where satisfied that notice of the hearing has been given. I am so satisfied as the tenant has been served with the notice of hearing by email.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
Before considering these claims, I note that an applicant, the landlord here, has the burden of proof placed on them to prove their claim to the required standard. This means they cannot just allege something; they must adduce evidence to persuade me that their version of events is the correct one. The standard is the civil standard of the “balance of probabilities” or what is “more likely than not”.

How much is owed for rent?

Ms Awhitu advised [redacted] that she had vacated the tenancy on 4 September. However, the parties had a fixed term tenancy. [redacted] arranged replacement tenants who moved in on 26 September. Accordingly, she seeks rent arrears to 25 September given Ms Awhitu broke the fixed term agreement. I am satisfied that this is appropriate and make the order as sought.

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 landlord has established in evidence that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, did not remove all rubbish and took a recycling bin. The landlord did claim compensation for two other rubbish bins however it was not established in evidence that they had been provided with the tenancy, therefore those claims are dismissed.
The amounts ordered for cleaning, carpet cleaning, rubbish removal, lawn mowing, and replacement of yellow recycling rubbish bin are proven in evidence

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.
I discuss each claim for compensation for damage separately as follows. Holes
The landlord has established that there were a number of holes in walls and doors at the end of the tenancy and many marks on the walls. This was a relatively short tenancy therefore I am satisfied that the damage is a mix of careless and intentional damage. Some of it was clearly done intentionally given the nature and extent of the holes, others appear to have occurred with a lack of reasonable care.
The landlord’s insurance excess is $2,500 and did not cover the repairs required. I am satisfied that the tenants are liable for the $2,300 sought and I have not reduced the claim to account for depreciation as the areas were only patch painted. Carpets
The landlord seeks $300 compensation for the fact that the carpets remained stained even after the carpet cleaning was undertaken. This has meant that they have aged more quickly than would otherwise be expected. This type of claim is known as accelerate depreciation. Accelerated depreciation is the concept that an item has aged more quickly than reasonably anticipated, however is still fit for purpose.
The carpets are approximately 8 years old and current depreciation guidelines estimate the life span of carpets in New Zealand rental properties to be 8 to 10 years depending on which room they are in. The stains here are extensive and cover all rooms however there were stains predating this tenancy.
I do not consider this claim justified in evidence given the state of the carpets at the commencement of the tenancy. Accordingly, this claim is dismissed. Blinds
The landlord has proven that blinds were removed by the tenants and broken; this is intentional damage. She therefore seeks $710 compensation for their replacement. The blinds were approximately 8 years old which is their expected lifespan. In considering compensation I must take into account betterment and depreciation. This means that 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 consider the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.
Whilst the blinds had met their lifespan, I accept that they nevertheless did have some life left in them. I therefore direct that $200 compensation is justified in the circumstances. Electrical sockets
The landlord has proven that two electrical sockets were smashed during the tenancy. I am satisfied that given the level of force required to inflict such damage, that this was caused intentionally. Accordingly, the claim for compensation is ordered as sought. Windows
The landlord has established in evidence that three windows were broken during the tenancy which I consider either careless or intentional damage. Accordingly, the tenant is liable for the amount claimed. Filing fee & suppression
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee and approve their claim for suppression.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4674752 — net $6,372.84 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 25/9/23	$4,500.00	Rent arrears to 25/9/23
Replace furnishings: letterbox	$60.00	Replace furnishings: letterbox
Replace furnishings: rubbish bin	$69.00	Replace furnishings: rubbish bin
Lawns and Garden work	$80.00	Lawns and Garden work
Carpet Cleaning	$310.00	Carpet Cleaning
Cleaning	$320.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$780.00	Rubbish removal
Repairs: electrics	$133.40	Repairs: electrics
Replace furnishings: blinds	$200.00	Replace furnishings: blinds
Window repairs: 3 window replacements	$1,200.00	Window repairs: 3 window replacements
Repairs: 10 holes	$2,300.00	Repairs: 10 holes
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$6,372.84
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$6,372.84

Order

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,600.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.
Carol Te Hapa Awhitu must pay [The landlord/s] $6,372.84 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

The landlord attended this remote teleconference hearing represented by [redacted] however none of the calls made to the number provided for the tenant at the allocated hearing time were answered. The Tribunal may hear matters in the absence of a party where satisfied that notice of the hearing has been given. I am so satisfied as the tenant has been served with the notice of hearing by email.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
Before considering these claims, I note that an applicant, the landlord here, has the burden of proof placed on them to prove their claim to the required standard. This means they cannot just allege something; they must adduce evidence to persuade me that their version of events is the correct one. The standard is the civil standard of the “balance of probabilities” or what is “more likely than not”.

How much is owed for rent?

Ms Awhitu advised [redacted] that she had vacated the tenancy on 4 September. However, the parties had a fixed term tenancy. [redacted] arranged replacement tenants who moved in on 26 September. Accordingly, she seeks rent arrears to 25 September given Ms Awhitu broke the fixed term agreement. I am satisfied that this is appropriate and make the order as sought.

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 landlord has established in evidence that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, did not remove all rubbish and took a recycling bin. The landlord did claim compensation for two other rubbish bins however it was not established in evidence that they had been provided with the tenancy, therefore those claims are dismissed.
The amounts ordered for cleaning, carpet cleaning, rubbish removal, lawn mowing, and replacement of yellow recycling rubbish bin are proven in evidence

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.
I discuss each claim for compensation for damage separately as follows. Holes
The landlord has established that there were a number of holes in walls and doors at the end of the tenancy and many marks on the walls. This was a relatively short tenancy therefore I am satisfied that the damage is a mix of careless and intentional damage. Some of it was clearly done intentionally given the nature and extent of the holes, others appear to have occurred with a lack of reasonable care.
The landlord’s insurance excess is $2,500 and did not cover the repairs required. I am satisfied that the tenants are liable for the $2,300 sought and I have not reduced the claim to account for depreciation as the areas were only patch painted. Carpets
The landlord seeks $300 compensation for the fact that the carpets remained stained even after the carpet cleaning was undertaken. This has meant that they have aged more quickly than would otherwise be expected. This type of claim is known as accelerate depreciation. Accelerated depreciation is the concept that an item has aged more quickly than reasonably anticipated, however is still fit for purpose.
The carpets are approximately 8 years old and current depreciation guidelines estimate the life span of carpets in New Zealand rental properties to be 8 to 10 years depending on which room they are in. The stains here are extensive and cover all rooms however there were stains predating this tenancy.
I do not consider this claim justified in evidence given the state of the carpets at the commencement of the tenancy. Accordingly, this claim is dismissed. Blinds
The landlord has proven that blinds were removed by the tenants and broken; this is intentional damage. She therefore seeks $710 compensation for their replacement. The blinds were approximately 8 years old which is their expected lifespan. In considering compensation I must take into account betterment and depreciation. This means that 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 consider the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.
Whilst the blinds had met their lifespan, I accept that they nevertheless did have some life left in them. I therefore direct that $200 compensation is justified in the circumstances. Electrical sockets
The landlord has proven that two electrical sockets were smashed during the tenancy. I am satisfied that given the level of force required to inflict such damage, that this was caused intentionally. Accordingly, the claim for compensation is ordered as sought. Windows
The landlord has established in evidence that three windows were broken during the tenancy which I consider either careless or intentional damage. Accordingly, the tenant is liable for the amount claimed. Filing fee & suppression
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee and approve their claim for suppression.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4674752 — Rent arrears at 3 Queenwood Avenue, Queenwood, Hamilton 3210

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4674752 — Rent arrears at 3 Queenwood Avenue, Queenwood, Hamilton 3210

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

How much is owed for rent?

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