What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4681409 about?

The tribunal order states: Hunter Hua must pay [The Applicant] $1296.44 immediately, as set out in the

How much money was awarded in case 4681409?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant; Rent Refund: $1,276.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4681409?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4681409?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10088734-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4681409 about?

The tribunal order states: Hunter Hua must pay [The Applicant] $1296.44 immediately, as set out in the

How much money was awarded in case 4681409?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant; Rent Refund: $1,276.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4681409?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4681409?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10088734-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit/Flat 1, 10A Walter Street, Hauraki, Auckland 0622 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4681409 — Tenancy dispute

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4681409 — net $1,296.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Rent Refund	$1,276.00	Rent Refund
Filing fee	$20.44	Filing fee
Net award	$1,296.44
Bond	$2,520.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,296.44

Both parties attended the hearing. The parties were assisted by the court appointed Mandarin interpreter.

The tenant has applied for refund of the bond. The landlord has a claim against the bond but has not filed a counterclaim with Tenancy Services.

Section 22B(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that, where a tenant applies for refund of the bond, and the landlord seeks payment from the bond, the landlord must file an application setting out the details of the counterclaim. Because the landlord has not filed a counterclaim the bond is refunded in full to the tenant.

The applicant is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.

The premises consist of a one level, two-bedroom townhouse in a block of three. The tenant and her young son resided there.

The tenant says that her tenancy came to an end by way of 28 days’ notice to end the tenancy. This was confirmed by the landlord during the hearing.

The applicant has made the following claims: Rubbish removal:

The tenant says that when she returned the key to the landlord he said that she had not cleared the rubbish. She says that she went to purchase a rubbish bag to remove everything. She said that the landlord required her to remove rubbish that same day.

She says that when she arrived the following day (17 July 2023) to remove rubbish she found the landlord there clearing it. The landlord had ordered an urgent rubbish truck to come and pick everything up. The tenant says that there was very little rubbish.

The landlord responded by stating that he inspected the property on 15 July 2023, the day before the tenant moved out. He says that there was rubbish at the property. The tenant had asked him to come and inspect the property the day before she vacated. He told her that the move out day is 16 July 2023 and that all her belongings would need to be out that day.

The tenant says that the landlord went there on the morning of the 17th and went ahead and ordered a rubbish removal truck without advising her. She thought it would be ok to remove the rubbish on the morning of the 17th. The tenant says that he never provided a copy of the rubbish removal invoice and never asked for her consent before removing the rubbish.

The landlord says he text her on 16 July 2023 regarding the rubbish stating that she needed to remove it. On 17 July 2023 the landlord said that the rubbish bins were full of rubbish including the food scrap bin. The landlord says he had no choice but to contact an urgent rubbish removal pickup as he had new tenants moving in that same day.

The landlord played a voicemail message from the tenant where she confirmed that she will pay some of the fees for rubbish removal. The landlord says that there was rubbish left in the garage and says the recycling bin was full.

The landlord is seeking to have the rubbish removal cost deducted from the bond. He has not filed a claim with the required evidence against the tenant in respect of this.

I make no order deducting rubbish removal costs from the bond. Rent overpayment:

The tenant claims she made an extra rent payment in error after the tenancy had ended on 16 July 2023. She says her rent came out fortnightly by automatic payment. A further payment of $1276.00 came out by mistake on 24 July 2023. The tenant provided a screenshot of her payment from her BNZ account confirming that the money had gone into the landlord’s account.

Landlord says that he never received that payment.

During the hearing the tenant provided a downloaded copy of her BNZ statement which clearly confirmed that the payment was made to the landlord on 24 July 2023. The landlord also confirmed his bank account number during the hearing. The landlord reiterated that he has not received the money. He says he also checked with his bank and that the money had not been deposited into his account.

Having sighted the tenant’s bank statement along with a screenshot confirming that the payment was made to the landlord’s bank account I am satisfied that the payment was made into the landlord’s account.

This claim by the tenant is proven. Genesis Power Account:

The tenant says that there was a gas heater in the living room and hallway wall. She never used these gas heaters. She says that she paid $110.29 based on a Genesis invoice which was sent to her. The invoice was addressed to ‘the occupier’.

The landlord says that the account from Genesis Energy came direct from Genesis to the tenant.

My view is that the tenant has paid an account of which she may not have been required to pay. The tenant says that she does not have a copy of the previous account which confirms how the amount is made up.

Without having the previous account confirming the usage and fixed charges I cannot be certain how much the tenant was required to pay, if anything, for the period she was residing there.

Accordingly, her claim for reimbursement of this amount must be dismissed. Heating:

The tenant says that there was no air conditioning and that the gas heaters were not working properly. She says that the gas heater was not vented properly and says she could smell gas. This is the reason she refused to use them. She says that the heating system was not in compliance with the HHS.

She also stated that she asked the landlord on numerous occasions if he could install an air conditioner. She said that she lived there with her 5-year-old child.

The landlord says he did not have to comply with the HHS heating standard at that stage. He says he has now replaced the heater. The tenant says that gas heater was old. After the tenant moved in she communicated with the landlord to install an air conditioner.

The tenancy started on 4 May 2023. The landlord had 120 days to comply with the heating standard. The tenancy ended within this time frame. The landlord still had time to comply with this requirement.

This claim by the tenant is also dismissed. Smoke alarm and power failure:

The tenant says she had to stay at an Airbnb on the first night due to there being no smoke alarm. She claims the cost of an Airbnb. No invoice or other evidence was provided in support of this claim.

The landlord says he went to the hardware store and purchased a new battery for the smoke alarm and put smoke alarm back the same day at 6pm. The landlord said he had one smoke alarm at the property.

On 9 May 2023 the tenant had to move out again for one night to an Air BnB because of a power cut. They ended up with no power and her child was scared. The landlord had an electrician attend the next day and was advised that the tenant had plugged something in which caused the issue. There is also no evidence that this was the fault of the landlord.

The tenant has not provided evidence of the cost of alternative accommodation for these two nights. I also accept the landlord’s evidence that the smoke alarm was reinstalled that same day.

This claim relating to Airbnb costs is dismissed. Garage roof leak:

The tenant says that the garage roof was leaking. She provided a photo in support in support of this. She says that she reported it on 18 June 2023. She stated that the water was leaking on to the washing machine and close to the power point.

The landlord says that this was a result of a heavy storm. He says that he removed leaves blocking the guttering which resolved the issue.

The tenant did not provide any further evidence in respect of this. I also see no evidence that the landlord failed to maintain the property in respect of this. From the limited photographic evidence provided by the tenant I have to accept that this was an isolated issue in the garage.

This claim in respect of the garage is dismissed.

Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

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 – section 95A Residential Tenancies Act.

The tenant applied for non-publication of her name and identifying details. She has substantially succeeded in the proceedings. I do not consider that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the tenant’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4681409 — net $1,296.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Rent Refund	$1,276.00	Rent Refund
Filing fee	$20.44	Filing fee
Net award	$1,296.44
Bond	$2,520.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,296.44