What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4695012 about?

The tribunal order states: Mikayla Henderson must pay [The landlord/s] $77.27 immediately, calculated as

How much money was awarded in case 4695012?

Cleaning: $320.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Broken Window: $236.83 awarded to landlord; hinges, curtain bracket and door han…: $325.00 awarded to landlord; Removing Wet Wipes From First Drain: $230.00 awarded to landlord; Removing Wet Wipes From Second Drain: $765.00 awarded to landlord; Trellis And Downpipe: $275.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Washing Line: $365.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $140.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4695012?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4695012?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9735809-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4695012 about?

The tribunal order states: Mikayla Henderson must pay [The landlord/s] $77.27 immediately, calculated as

How much money was awarded in case 4695012?

Cleaning: $320.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Broken Window: $236.83 awarded to landlord; hinges, curtain bracket and door han…: $325.00 awarded to landlord; Removing Wet Wipes From First Drain: $230.00 awarded to landlord; Removing Wet Wipes From Second Drain: $765.00 awarded to landlord; Trellis And Downpipe: $275.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Washing Line: $365.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $140.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4695012?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4695012?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9735809-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4695012 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4695012 — net $77.27 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Yard cleaning	$320.00	Yard cleaning
Rubbish removal	$140.00	Rubbish removal
Repairs: removing wet wipes from first drain	$230.00	Repairs: removing wet wipes from first drain
Repairs: removing wet wipes from second drain	$765.00	Repairs: removing wet wipes from second drain
Repairs: broken window	$236.83	Repairs: broken window
Repairs: trellis and downpipe	$275.00	Repairs: trellis and downpipe
Repairs: hinges, curtain bracket and door handle	$325.00	Repairs: hinges, curtain bracket and door handle
Replace washing line	$365.00	Replace washing line
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$77.27
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$77.27

The landlord attended the hearing. There was no appearance by the tenant.

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

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). There is also an obligation to keep the premises reasonably clean and tidy during the tenancy. Exterior grounds

The tenant did not keep the exterior grounds tidy during the tenancy as shown in photos produced in evidence. Just before the tenancy ended, she agreed that the landlord could arrange for someone to slash long grass at the premises and remove some rubbish from the grounds. The landlord’s representative says this was agreed orally but was not able to say whether the cost of the work was agreed. Certainly, there was no agreement in writing.

The landlord, who is a property management company, arranged it’s in-house employees to complete the work. They invoiced $604.90 for labour and tip fees, for which they now seek reimbursement. The hourly rate charged for labour was $80 plus GST. No receipt was produced for the tip charge of $86 plus GST.

After carefully reviewing the photos showing the condition of the grounds and the nature of the work required, I am not satisfied that the amount charged is reasonable. I find that the hourly rate charged for the work is excessive on the basis that it is not consistent with other commercial rates that the Tribunal sees for work of this nature. I also find that the total amount charged is out of proportion and beyond the work required as shown in the photo evidence. Therefore, I have reduced the amount claimed to $320.

The tenant left rubbish and belongings at the premises after the tenancy ended which the landlord’s employees removed. Photos produced in evidence show that there were some large items such as a couch, chair and two mattresses but it was likely not much more than a trailer load. The landlord invoiced $230 for this work charging a “unit price” of $100 plus GST for two units of labour. It appears that this is for more than one employee, although the invoice does not specify how many. The landlord said at the hearing that the unit price for labour included tip fees. However, no receipt was provided for tip fees and it was not separately itemised on the invoice. In summary, it is difficult to determine how the charges were calculated. After reviewing the photo evidence, I am not satisfied that the amount charged is reasonable and I have reduced the amount sought to $140.

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 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. In this case the landlord’s insurance excess is $750.

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. Blocked drains

I am satisfied on the evidence that two drains at the property were blocked during the tenancy with wet wipes. The first sewage drain was blocked in January 2023, almost 6 months after the tenancy began. The photo of the wipes pulled from the drain show that they are reasonably intact and white which indicates that they were likely flushed down the drain in recent months during the tenancy. The landlord engaged an outside contractor who completed a high pressure drain clean to unblock the sewer system. Their invoice of $230 is approved.

A second drain was also blocked with wet wipes in February 2023. Again, photos of the wipes pulled from the drain show that they are reasonably intact, and likely put down the drain during the tenancy. The landlord sent one of its employees to unblock the drain. However, the drain continued to block, and the landlord engaged another outside contractor to unblock it. They used a camera and determined there were wet wipes further down the drain which had to be removed with water jet equipment. Their invoice for $592.50 is approved. The landlord’s invoice for its employee’s first attempt to unblock the drain was $280.31 which charged labour at $97.50 plus GST/hour for 2.5 hours of work. Comparing this with the invoices from the outside contractors, I am not satisfied that the rate charged is reasonable for the work and I am reducing the amount sought to $172.50. Therefore, the total costs awarded to unblock the second drain is $765. Broken window panel on the back door

I am satisfied on the evidence that the window was broken at the end of the tenancy and the tenant is liable for the repair cost charged by the outside contractor engaged by the landlord. Broken clothesline

I am satisfied on the evidence that the clothesline was broken at the end of the tenancy and had to be replaced. The landlord’s employees removed the clothesline which was concreted into the ground and replaced it with a new clothesline attached to the fence. The landlord’s invoice for the work totals $747.50. Labour is charged at $80 plus GST per hour for 4.5 hours work. I consider the labour rate and the overall amount charged is excessive for the work involved.

The cost of the replacement washing line was $247 plus GST. However, I must consider 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 likely age and condition of the clothesline at the start of the tenancy and its likely useful lifespan.

After carefully considering the evidence, the work involved in removing and replacing the clothesline, and allowing for depreciation, I am reducing the claim to $365. Various repairs

The following damage was caused during the tenancy: broken downpipe T connection; broken trellis fence; broken curtain rail brackets, broken kitchen cupboard hinges and broken door handle. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The landlord’s employees completed the repairs and the landlord issued invoices for $530.15 and $555.45. Labour rates were charged at $80 plus GST/hour. I consider the labour rate and the overall amount charged is excessive for the work involved. I also note that one of the invoices included the costs of screwing the gas meter cover back on but there was no photo to prove that damage. Therefore, that part of the claim is dismissed.

After carefully considering the evidence, and the work involved I am reducing the invoices as follows: The invoice for $530.15 is reduced to $275 and the invoice for $555.45 is reduced to $325.

The amounts ordered are proved.

As the landlord has largely succeeded with their claim, they are entitled to reimbursement of the filing fee and to suppression orders , as requested in their application.

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4695012 — net $77.27 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Yard cleaning	$320.00	Yard cleaning
Rubbish removal	$140.00	Rubbish removal
Repairs: removing wet wipes from first drain	$230.00	Repairs: removing wet wipes from first drain
Repairs: removing wet wipes from second drain	$765.00	Repairs: removing wet wipes from second drain
Repairs: broken window	$236.83	Repairs: broken window
Repairs: trellis and downpipe	$275.00	Repairs: trellis and downpipe
Repairs: hinges, curtain bracket and door handle	$325.00	Repairs: hinges, curtain bracket and door handle
Replace washing line	$365.00	Replace washing line
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$77.27
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$77.27

The landlord attended the hearing. There was no appearance by the tenant.

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

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

After carefully considering the evidence, the work involved in removing and replacing the clothesline, and allowing for depreciation, I am reducing the claim to $365. Various repairs

After carefully considering the evidence, and the work involved I am reducing the invoices as follows: The invoice for $530.15 is reduced to $275 and the invoice for $555.45 is reduced to $325.

The amounts ordered are proved.

As the landlord has largely succeeded with their claim, they are entitled to reimbursement of the filing fee and to suppression orders , as requested in their application.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4695012 — Property damage

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4695012 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Order

Reasons

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