What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4705789 about?

The tribunal order states: No order is made for any payment as Colin Cashmore has already paid [The

How much money was awarded in case 4705789?

Carpet Shampoo, Kitchen Pantry, Drau…: $658.95 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $517.50 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Front Door Frame: $287.50 awarded to landlord; Residual Amount: $16.61 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $299.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4705789?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4705789?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10071296-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4705789 about?

The tribunal order states: No order is made for any payment as Colin Cashmore has already paid [The

How much money was awarded in case 4705789?

Carpet Shampoo, Kitchen Pantry, Drau…: $658.95 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $517.50 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Front Door Frame: $287.50 awarded to landlord; Residual Amount: $16.61 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $299.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4705789?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4705789?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10071296-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4705789 — Cleanliness

Tenantcheck Insights

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4705789 — Cleanliness | TenantCheck

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4705789 — net $1,800.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Carpet shampoo, kitchen pantry, draught seal	$658.95	Carpet shampoo, kitchen pantry, draught seal
Repairs: Front door frame	$287.50	Repairs: Front door frame
Rubbish removal	$299.00	Rubbish removal
Cleaning: Exit cleaning	$517.50	Cleaning: Exit cleaning
Residual amount	$16.61	Residual amount
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,800.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,800.00

Claims and awards for application 4705789 — net $1,800.00 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Carpet shampoo, kitchen pantry, draught seal

Amount: $658.95
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Carpet shampoo, kitchen pantry, draught seal

Repairs: Front door frame

Amount: $287.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Front door frame

Rubbish removal

Amount: $299.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal

Cleaning: Exit cleaning

Amount: $517.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning: Exit cleaning

Residual amount

Amount: $16.61
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Residual amount

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Filing Fee Property damage Rubbish Removal

Order

No order is made for any payment as Colin Cashmore has already paid [The landlord/s] $1,800.00 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not.
The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Tenant’s responsibilities 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, and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish.
For damage claims, the 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. 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. 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 Tribunal must also take 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 taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Landlord’s claims
The landlord sought compensation for shampooing carpets in lounge and bedroom, installing drought seal on front door frame, installing kitchen pantry, damaged front door frame, removal of rubbish, one-bedroom exit cleaning, and purchase of second-hand double bed and 2-seater couch.
Having seen the photos and invoices, I find that the landlord has proven all the claims except the compensation claim for the purchase of the second-hand double bed and 2-seater couch.
The useful lifespan for furniture is 10 years. I note that this property was purchased by the owner over 10 years ago. There was nothing provided to suggest that the existing couch and the bed were less than 10 years old. As the landlord did not have proof of purchase of the existing couch and the bed, I decline to award the amount sought for the replacement.
However, I note that the bond of $1,800.00 has already been paid to the landlord by the tenant.
I acknowledge there may be some residual amount needs to be ordered for the disposal of the couch and the bed. I grant the landlord $16.61 to prevent the need for any refund of the bond back to the tenant.
If the landlord finds proof of purchase of the existing couch and the bed and there is value exceeding $16.61 after depreciation, then the landlord can lodge another application to seek the amount. Filing fee reimbursement
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim, I have ordered the filing fee to be paid by the tenant.

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4705789 — net $1,800.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Carpet shampoo, kitchen pantry, draught seal	$658.95	Carpet shampoo, kitchen pantry, draught seal
Repairs: Front door frame	$287.50	Repairs: Front door frame
Rubbish removal	$299.00	Rubbish removal
Cleaning: Exit cleaning	$517.50	Cleaning: Exit cleaning
Residual amount	$16.61	Residual amount
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,800.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,800.00

Claims and awards for application 4705789 — net $1,800.00 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Carpet shampoo, kitchen pantry, draught seal

Amount: $658.95
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Carpet shampoo, kitchen pantry, draught seal

Repairs: Front door frame

Amount: $287.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Front door frame

Rubbish removal

Amount: $299.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal

Cleaning: Exit cleaning

Amount: $517.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning: Exit cleaning

Residual amount

Amount: $16.61
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Residual amount

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Filing Fee Property damage Rubbish Removal

Order

No order is made for any payment as Colin Cashmore has already paid [The landlord/s] $1,800.00 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not.
The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Tenant’s responsibilities 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, and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish.
For damage claims, the 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. 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. 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 Tribunal must also take 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 taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Landlord’s claims
The landlord sought compensation for shampooing carpets in lounge and bedroom, installing drought seal on front door frame, installing kitchen pantry, damaged front door frame, removal of rubbish, one-bedroom exit cleaning, and purchase of second-hand double bed and 2-seater couch.
Having seen the photos and invoices, I find that the landlord has proven all the claims except the compensation claim for the purchase of the second-hand double bed and 2-seater couch.
The useful lifespan for furniture is 10 years. I note that this property was purchased by the owner over 10 years ago. There was nothing provided to suggest that the existing couch and the bed were less than 10 years old. As the landlord did not have proof of purchase of the existing couch and the bed, I decline to award the amount sought for the replacement.
However, I note that the bond of $1,800.00 has already been paid to the landlord by the tenant.
I acknowledge there may be some residual amount needs to be ordered for the disposal of the couch and the bed. I grant the landlord $16.61 to prevent the need for any refund of the bond back to the tenant.
If the landlord finds proof of purchase of the existing couch and the bed and there is value exceeding $16.61 after depreciation, then the landlord can lodge another application to seek the amount. Filing fee reimbursement
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim, I have ordered the filing fee to be paid by the tenant.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4705789 — Cleanliness

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4705789 — Cleanliness

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions