What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4685450?

The tribunal order states: Lautasi Samaeli must pay Lc Management Limited T/A A Grade Rental Homes

How much money was awarded in case 4685450?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $220.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $60.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $773.69 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $300.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4685450?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4685450?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9591472-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4685450?

The tribunal order states: Lautasi Samaeli must pay Lc Management Limited T/A A Grade Rental Homes

How much money was awarded in case 4685450?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $220.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $60.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $773.69 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $300.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4685450?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4685450?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9591472-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

38A Neal Avenue, Glenfield, Auckland 0629 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4685450 — Property damage

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4685450 — net $1,374.13 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears (to 1/11/2023	$60.00	Rent arrears (to 1/11/2023
Water rates (Aug to Dec 2022 and Jan to Aug 2023	$773.69	Water rates (Aug to Dec 2022 and Jan to Aug 2023
Window repairs: (glass panels in main door	$300.00	Window repairs: (glass panels in main door
Lock/key replacement: (sliding door lock	$220.00	Lock/key replacement: (sliding door lock
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,374.13
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,374.13

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not.

I am satisfied that the tenant had received proper notice of the hearing time, date and place and chose not to attend.

The landlord has applied for rent arrears, outgoings arrears, compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee. Claim for 12 months arrears of water rates

The landlord provided water rates invoices for the periods August to December 2022 and January to August 2023, which prove the amount owing, as at August 2023.

The landlord is concerned about the ongoing breaches of the tenant’s obligations of s39(3) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“the Act”) and her failure to remedy the breaches despite being issued notices to do so. The landlord has not applied for termination of the tenancy as it is trying to preserve the tenancy where at all possible.

Where the tenant continues to breach her obligations under s39(3) of the Act by not paying her water rates and any other applicable outgoings, her tenancy may be at risk pursuant to s56 of the Act.

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. A sliding door lock was damaged from careless and excessive force; and b. Broken glass panels in the main door that was caused by a visitor slamming the door shut with such force that the glass smashed.

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

The amounts claimed are less than the insurance excess, so an insurance claim has not been made for the damage.

The compensatory amounts ordered are proved by the landlord by receipts for the repairs made to the premises. Fair wear and tear costs were not claimed.

I have taken into account 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 Lc Management Limited T/A A Grade Rental Homes As Agent For Lai King To has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4685450 — net $1,374.13 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears (to 1/11/2023	$60.00	Rent arrears (to 1/11/2023
Water rates (Aug to Dec 2022 and Jan to Aug 2023	$773.69	Water rates (Aug to Dec 2022 and Jan to Aug 2023
Window repairs: (glass panels in main door	$300.00	Window repairs: (glass panels in main door
Lock/key replacement: (sliding door lock	$220.00	Lock/key replacement: (sliding door lock
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,374.13
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,374.13

Order

Lautasi Samaeli must pay Lc Management Limited T/A A Grade Rental Homes As Agent For Lai King To $1,374.13 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not.
I am satisfied that the tenant had received proper notice of the hearing time, date and place and chose not to attend.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, outgoings arrears, compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee. Claim for 12 months arrears of water rates
The landlord provided water rates invoices for the periods August to December 2022 and January to August 2023, which prove the amount owing, as at August 2023.
The landlord is concerned about the ongoing breaches of the tenant’s obligations of s39(3) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“the Act”) and her failure to remedy the breaches despite being issued notices to do so. The landlord has not applied for termination of the tenancy as it is trying to preserve the tenancy where at all possible.
Where the tenant continues to breach her obligations under s39(3) of the Act by not paying her water rates and any other applicable outgoings, her tenancy may be at risk pursuant to s56 of the Act.

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. A sliding door lock was damaged from careless and excessive force; and b. Broken glass panels in the main door that was caused by a visitor slamming the door shut with such force that the glass smashed.
The landlord provided evidence that the damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts claimed are less than the insurance excess, so an insurance claim has not been made for the damage.
The compensatory amounts ordered are proved by the landlord by receipts for the repairs made to the premises. Fair wear and tear costs were not claimed.
I have taken into account 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 Lc Management Limited T/A A Grade Rental Homes As Agent For Lai King To has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4685450 — Property damage at 38A Neal Avenue, Glenfield, Auckland 0629

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4685450 — Property damage at 38A Neal Avenue, Glenfield, Auckland 0629

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions