What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4737714?

The tribunal order states: Frances Olson must pay Holmwood Real Estate Limited as agent for Brock-

How much money was awarded in case 4737714?

Cleaning: $790.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $391.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $40.72 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $224.25 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $69.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $186.65 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $250.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4737714?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4737714?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9835038-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4737714?

The tribunal order states: Frances Olson must pay Holmwood Real Estate Limited as agent for Brock-

How much money was awarded in case 4737714?

Cleaning: $790.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $391.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $40.72 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $224.25 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $69.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $186.65 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $250.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4737714?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4737714?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9835038-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

40 Liverton Crescent, Bishopdale, Christchurch 8053 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4737714 — Cleanliness

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4737714 — net $1,890.62 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Lawns and Garden work	$391.00		Lawns and Garden work
Rubbish removal: Dump fees	$186.65		Rubbish removal: Dump fees
Cleaning	$790.00		Cleaning
Rubbish removal: Owner's hours 10 @/hr	$250.00		Rubbish removal: Owner's hours 10 @/hr
Repairs: Painting damaged door	$69.00		Repairs: Painting damaged door
Repairs: Damaged shelves	$224.25		Repairs: Damaged shelves
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44		Filing fee reimbursement
Balance of bond after rent arrears paid		$40.72	Balance of bond after rent arrears paid
Total award	$1,931.34	$40.72
Net award	$1,890.62
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,890.62

Frances Olson must pay Holmwood Real Estate Limited as agent for Brock- Smith Holdings Limited $1,890.62 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

The landlord’s claims for rent arrears and plumbing costs were withdrawn at the hearing.

The landlord’s claim for carpet cleaning is dismissed.

Reasons

Ms Brown attended the hearing on behalf of the landlord. The tenant did not attend.

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

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 17 October 2023. The landlord claimed for rent arrears of $1,639.28 in its application but advised at the hearing that the full rent arrears had been covered by a bond refund on 13 November 2023.

The full bond amount of $1,680.00 was refunded to the landlord on that date. Once the rent arrears had been cleared, there was a balance of $40.72 which has been credited to the tenant as shown above.

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 under section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act).

The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.

The landlord provided photographs, invoices, and other documentation to prove that the property had not been cleaned at the end of the tenancy. The gardens had not been attended to and considerable rubbish was left both inside and outside.

The amount claimed for house cleaning ($850.00) was reduced by $60.00 by consent as it included costs for outside windows which the tenant could not reasonably have been expected to clean.

The landlord also claimed for professional carpet cleaning ($160.00) but was unable to prove that this was necessary to meet the standard of cleanliness required under the Act.

The amounts ordered are proved.

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 under sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B of the Act.

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.

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).

During the tenancy the vanity tap began to leak and the tenant did not inform the landlord of the leak as required by section 40(1)(d) of the Act. Consequently, the vanity unit suffered water damage which required the replacement of a shelf within that unit at a cost of $224.25.

During the tenancy, the tenant hung an over door cat scratcher on the living room door. The movement of the cat scratcher caused damage to the door which had to be repainted at a cost of $69.00.

The amounts ordered are proved.

As Holmwood Real Estate Limited as agent for Brock-Smith Holdings Limited has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4737714 — net $1,890.62 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Lawns and Garden work	$391.00		Lawns and Garden work
Rubbish removal: Dump fees	$186.65		Rubbish removal: Dump fees
Cleaning	$790.00		Cleaning
Rubbish removal: Owner's hours 10 @/hr	$250.00		Rubbish removal: Owner's hours 10 @/hr
Repairs: Painting damaged door	$69.00		Repairs: Painting damaged door
Repairs: Damaged shelves	$224.25		Repairs: Damaged shelves
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44		Filing fee reimbursement
Balance of bond after rent arrears paid		$40.72	Balance of bond after rent arrears paid
Total award	$1,931.34	$40.72
Net award	$1,890.62
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,890.62

Order

Frances Olson must pay Holmwood Real Estate Limited as agent for Brock- Smith Holdings Limited $1,890.62 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The landlord’s claims for rent arrears and plumbing costs were withdrawn at the hearing.
The landlord’s claim for carpet cleaning is dismissed.

Reasons

Ms Brown attended the hearing on behalf of the landlord. The tenant did not attend.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 17 October 2023. The landlord claimed for rent arrears of $1,639.28 in its application but advised at the hearing that the full rent arrears had been covered by a bond refund on 13 November 2023.
The full bond amount of $1,680.00 was refunded to the landlord on that date. Once the rent arrears had been cleared, there was a balance of $40.72 which has been credited to the tenant as shown above.

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 under section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act).
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
The landlord provided photographs, invoices, and other documentation to prove that the property had not been cleaned at the end of the tenancy. The gardens had not been attended to and considerable rubbish was left both inside and outside.
The amount claimed for house cleaning ($850.00) was reduced by $60.00 by consent as it included costs for outside windows which the tenant could not reasonably have been expected to clean.
The landlord also claimed for professional carpet cleaning ($160.00) but was unable to prove that this was necessary to meet the standard of cleanliness required under the Act.
The amounts ordered are proved.

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 under sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B of the Act.
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.
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).
During the tenancy the vanity tap began to leak and the tenant did not inform the landlord of the leak as required by section 40(1)(d) of the Act. Consequently, the vanity unit suffered water damage which required the replacement of a shelf within that unit at a cost of $224.25.
During the tenancy, the tenant hung an over door cat scratcher on the living room door. The movement of the cat scratcher caused damage to the door which had to be repainted at a cost of $69.00.
The amounts ordered are proved.
As Holmwood Real Estate Limited as agent for Brock-Smith Holdings Limited has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4737714 — Cleanliness at 40 Liverton Crescent, Bishopdale, Christchurch 8053

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4737714 — Cleanliness at 40 Liverton Crescent, Bishopdale, Christchurch 8053

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions