What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4680829?

The tribunal order states: Naomi Ann Phyllis Holmes and Patrick Kennedy Aiono must pay Premium Realty

How much money was awarded in case 4680829?

Cleaning: $918.85 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $172.50 awarded to landlord; Pest Control: $402.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $690.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,437.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $339.25 awarded to landlord; Rent: $4,223.57 awarded to landlord; Walls: $460.00 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: oven and stove…: $800.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $2,012.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4680829?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4680829?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9843540-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4680829?

The tribunal order states: Naomi Ann Phyllis Holmes and Patrick Kennedy Aiono must pay Premium Realty

How much money was awarded in case 4680829?

Cleaning: $918.85 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $172.50 awarded to landlord; Pest Control: $402.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $690.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,437.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $339.25 awarded to landlord; Rent: $4,223.57 awarded to landlord; Walls: $460.00 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: oven and stove…: $800.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $2,012.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4680829?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4680829?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9843540-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

41 Milton Road, Papatoetoe, Auckland 2024 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4680829 — Property damage

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4680829 — net $11,477.11 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent to 30 July 2023	$4,223.57	Rent to 30 July 2023
Rubbish removal	$2,012.50	Rubbish removal
Lock/key replacement	$690.00	Lock/key replacement
Replace furnishings: oven and stove top	$800.00	Replace furnishings: oven and stove top
Lawns and Garden work	$172.50	Lawns and Garden work
Repairs: walls	$460.00	Repairs: walls
Painting 3 rooms after repairs	$1,437.50	Painting 3 rooms after repairs
Cleaning and carpet cleaning	$918.85	Cleaning and carpet cleaning
Pest control	$402.50	Pest control
Window repairs	$339.25	Window repairs
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$11,477.11
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$11,477.11

Both parties attended the hearing on 16 January 2024.

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

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 30 July 2023. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy after deduction of the bond. The tenants did not dispute liability for the rent arrears.

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.

The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. There were a lot of belongings left inside and outside the property, including large items of furniture. I accept that the property would have required general cleaning throughout once the tenants’ belongings had been removed.

The tenant did not return the keys. The locks had to be changed to secure the property.

The lawns were overgrown and needed mowing at the end of the tenancy.

Pest control was performed at the end of the tenancy. The landlord said the rubbish left inside and outside the property had attracted pests. I consider it likely that the condition of the property as shown in the exit inspection photographs attracted vermin. The costs claimed appear reasonable.

I note that the tenants accepted responsibility for all these costs.

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.

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 4 weeks' rent.

Where the damage is careless and is not covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to 4 weeks' rent. The landlord provided correspondence with insurers showing that some costs were declined by insurers as being maintenance and other costs were considered uneconomic to claim. The insurance excess was $500.00.

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.

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.

Damage was caused during the tenancy. There were holes to the walls of the living room and bedrooms 1 and 2. The tenants accepted liability for the damage but queried the cost. The walls had to be patched and painted. The landlord claimed the cost of repainting the entire house ($2,875.00) but after discussion reduced the claim by 50%. I am satisfied that this reflects the reasonable cost of repairing and painting the 3 affected rooms in this 3-bedroom property.

A bedroom window was broken. The tenants accepted that they caused the damage. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The landlord claimed the cost of replacement curtains and blinds ($805.00). There was a photograph showing the curtains on the floor in the hallway. There was another photograph showing the blind in the kitchen half open and at a lopsided angle. The tenants said the blinds were tangled but not broken. The curtains were mouldy, so they took them down. They tried to wash the mould. I note that the ingoing inspection report identifies the condition of the kitchen blinds as “dusty” and the curtains in bedroom 2 as “not clean”. I am not satisfied that the tenants damaged the curtains or that the blinds could not be untangled.

The oven was not working at the end of the tenancy and a knob at the front was missing. The tenants said they had problems throughout the tenancy with only 2 elements working and they notified the landlord. The ingoing inspection report identifies that the oven and hob were in working condition. The tenants did not provide any evidence that they had notified the landlord, or that the landlord had failed to respond to any maintenance concerns. The oven and hob obviously needed cleaning at the end of the tenancy and look like they had been used extensively. I award the cost of a replacement second-hand oven in the sum of $800.00. The landlord claimed $1,723.85 for a brand-new oven, but the oven in the property was said to be about 3 years old and would have had an economic life of about 8 years.

There was a suggestion by one of the tenants that they had been removed from the tenancy agreement at some stage, with the implication that he was not liable for the damage. The starting point is that tenants are jointly and severally liable for any breach of the tenants’ obligations and this was recognised in the tenancy agreement. No evidence was presented to establish when one of the tenants was removed from the tenancy, whether they vacated earlier (my impression was the tenants moved out together) or showing that the damage occurred after one of the tenants had left. I therefore find the tenants jointly liable. Filing fee

The landlord’s application has been substantially successful. I award the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4680829 — net $11,477.11 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent to 30 July 2023	$4,223.57	Rent to 30 July 2023
Rubbish removal	$2,012.50	Rubbish removal
Lock/key replacement	$690.00	Lock/key replacement
Replace furnishings: oven and stove top	$800.00	Replace furnishings: oven and stove top
Lawns and Garden work	$172.50	Lawns and Garden work
Repairs: walls	$460.00	Repairs: walls
Painting 3 rooms after repairs	$1,437.50	Painting 3 rooms after repairs
Cleaning and carpet cleaning	$918.85	Cleaning and carpet cleaning
Pest control	$402.50	Pest control
Window repairs	$339.25	Window repairs
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$11,477.11
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$11,477.11

Order

Naomi Ann Phyllis Holmes and Patrick Kennedy Aiono must pay Premium Realty Limited $11,477.11 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 16 January 2024.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 30 July 2023. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy after deduction of the bond. The tenants did not dispute liability for the rent arrears.

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.
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. There were a lot of belongings left inside and outside the property, including large items of furniture. I accept that the property would have required general cleaning throughout once the tenants’ belongings had been removed.
The tenant did not return the keys. The locks had to be changed to secure the property.
The lawns were overgrown and needed mowing at the end of the tenancy.
Pest control was performed at the end of the tenancy. The landlord said the rubbish left inside and outside the property had attracted pests. I consider it likely that the condition of the property as shown in the exit inspection photographs attracted vermin. The costs claimed appear reasonable.
I note that the tenants accepted responsibility for all these costs.

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.
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 4 weeks' rent.
Where the damage is careless and is not covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to 4 weeks' rent. The landlord provided correspondence with insurers showing that some costs were declined by insurers as being maintenance and other costs were considered uneconomic to claim. The insurance excess was $500.00.
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.
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.
Damage was caused during the tenancy. There were holes to the walls of the living room and bedrooms 1 and 2. The tenants accepted liability for the damage but queried the cost. The walls had to be patched and painted. The landlord claimed the cost of repainting the entire house ($2,875.00) but after discussion reduced the claim by 50%. I am satisfied that this reflects the reasonable cost of repairing and painting the 3 affected rooms in this 3-bedroom property.
A bedroom window was broken. The tenants accepted that they caused the damage. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord claimed the cost of replacement curtains and blinds ($805.00). There was a photograph showing the curtains on the floor in the hallway. There was another photograph showing the blind in the kitchen half open and at a lopsided angle. The tenants said the blinds were tangled but not broken. The curtains were mouldy, so they took them down. They tried to wash the mould. I note that the ingoing inspection report identifies the condition of the kitchen blinds as “dusty” and the curtains in bedroom 2 as “not clean”. I am not satisfied that the tenants damaged the curtains or that the blinds could not be untangled.
The oven was not working at the end of the tenancy and a knob at the front was missing. The tenants said they had problems throughout the tenancy with only 2 elements working and they notified the landlord. The ingoing inspection report identifies that the oven and hob were in working condition. The tenants did not provide any evidence that they had notified the landlord, or that the landlord had failed to respond to any maintenance concerns. The oven and hob obviously needed cleaning at the end of the tenancy and look like they had been used extensively. I award the cost of a replacement second-hand oven in the sum of $800.00. The landlord claimed $1,723.85 for a brand-new oven, but the oven in the property was said to be about 3 years old and would have had an economic life of about 8 years.
There was a suggestion by one of the tenants that they had been removed from the tenancy agreement at some stage, with the implication that he was not liable for the damage. The starting point is that tenants are jointly and severally liable for any breach of the tenants’ obligations and this was recognised in the tenancy agreement. No evidence was presented to establish when one of the tenants was removed from the tenancy, whether they vacated earlier (my impression was the tenants moved out together) or showing that the damage occurred after one of the tenants had left. I therefore find the tenants jointly liable. Filing fee
The landlord’s application has been substantially successful. I award the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4680829 — Property damage at 41 Milton Road, Papatoetoe, Auckland 2024

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4680829 — Property damage at 41 Milton Road, Papatoetoe, Auckland 2024

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions