What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4711010 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant] owes Siddhesh Sakpal and Sneha Sakpai $1,042.34 to be paid to

How much money was awarded in case 4711010?

Cleaning: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $517.63 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $324.71 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4711010?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4711010?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10326191-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4711010 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant] owes Siddhesh Sakpal and Sneha Sakpai $1,042.34 to be paid to

How much money was awarded in case 4711010?

Cleaning: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $517.63 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $324.71 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4711010?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4711010?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10326191-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4711010 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4711010 — net $1,042.34 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Repairs: Kitchen Wall Repair and Paint	$324.71	Repairs: Kitchen Wall Repair and Paint
Repairs: Bedroom Wall Repair and Paint	$517.63	Repairs: Bedroom Wall Repair and Paint
Cleaning (internal house clean	$200.00	Cleaning (internal house clean
Net award	$1,042.34
Bond	$2,000.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,042.34

[The tenant] owes Siddhesh Sakpal and Sneha Sakpai $1,042.34 to be paid to them from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,000.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: Siddhesh Sakpal and Sneha Sakpai: $1,042.34 [The tenant]: $957.66

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

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

The tenant has made a cross application for refund of the bond and reimbursement of the filing fee. In his cross application he also disputes the landlord’s general damages claims.

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. The tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.

The tenant primarily left the premises reasonably clean and tidy but did leave some surfaces slightly dusty and not fully clean. He stated he had organsied some help to clean on exiting the property but that help had let him down. As such, while the house was largely reasonably clean and tidy, the tenant accepted in some areas his cleaning could have been a bit more thorough. Therefore, I have awarded half the cleaning costs claimed.

The landlord claims a removal fee for household waste left in the general council rubbish bin and recycle bin. The general rubbish bin was due to be emptied two days after the end of the tenancy and the recycling bin the following week. I do not accept that a tenant must leave the council bins empty at the end of the tenancy. He put them out at the curb side to be collected and left a separate recycle bin for a new tenant to use in the intervening week. However, the new tenant had not moved in prior to the recycling collection date and the tenant came and removed the extra recycle bin he had left on recycling day. I also do not accept that the rubbish left in the garage belonged to the tenant and have not awarded the costs sought for the removal of some pallets left in the garage. It appears the pallets may have been left by a resident of another unit or that they were in the back of the garage at the commencement of the tenancy but obscured under other items in that area of the garage.

The amounts ordered are proved by paid invoices.

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. Damage to the kitchen wall from the installation and removal of a microwave shelf. The patching was not fully smoothed off and the paint did not match the colour of the wall leaving obvious imperfections on what had prior to the tenancy been a wall free of scratches, holes and other marks with paint that was a standard colour across the entire wall. The tenant accepted he had patched and painted the holes during the tenancy and that the paint colour was not a good match; b. Damage to the bedroom wall. The tenant denies responsibility for this damage but the landlord produced a photograph of that wall, dated 6 August 2022, prior to the commencement of the tenancy and just after the painting renovations had been completed. This photograph shows the wall free of the cuts and mismatched paint that are evident in the exit inspection photographs.

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

The amounts ordered are proved.

I have not accepted the landlord’s claim for the lounge wall, as there was no evidence produced to support the claim the tenant caused the pin hole damage to the wall behind a backed cabinet he had in that position for the duration of his tenancy.

I have considered 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. Reimbursement of the filing fee

Because Siddhesh Sakpal, Sneha Sakpai and [the tenant] have substantially succeeded in their respective claims, neither parties claims for reimbursement of the filing fee succeeds and those costs lay where they fall.

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4711010 — net $1,042.34 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Repairs: Kitchen Wall Repair and Paint	$324.71	Repairs: Kitchen Wall Repair and Paint
Repairs: Bedroom Wall Repair and Paint	$517.63	Repairs: Bedroom Wall Repair and Paint
Cleaning (internal house clean	$200.00	Cleaning (internal house clean
Net award	$1,042.34
Bond	$2,000.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,042.34

[The tenant] owes Siddhesh Sakpal and Sneha Sakpai $1,042.34 to be paid to them from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,000.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: Siddhesh Sakpal and Sneha Sakpai: $1,042.34 [The tenant]: $957.66

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

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

The tenant has made a cross application for refund of the bond and reimbursement of the filing fee. In his cross application he also disputes the landlord’s general damages claims.

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

The amounts ordered are proved by paid invoices.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

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

The amounts ordered are proved.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4711010 — Property damage

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4711010 — 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