What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4738569 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] to pay Holmwood Real Estate Limited As Agent For Olivia

How much money was awarded in case 4738569?

Cleaning: $220.00 awarded to landlord; Painting: $650.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $50.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Armchair Cover: $50.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Broken Mop: $20.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Oven Tray: $40.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4738569?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4738569?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9906628-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4738569 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] to pay Holmwood Real Estate Limited As Agent For Olivia

How much money was awarded in case 4738569?

Cleaning: $220.00 awarded to landlord; Painting: $650.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $50.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Armchair Cover: $50.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Broken Mop: $20.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Oven Tray: $40.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4738569?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4738569?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9906628-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4738569 — Cleanliness

Tenantcheck Insights

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4738569 — 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 4738569 — net $1,030.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Replace broken mop	$20.00	Replace broken mop
Repair table (landlord labour	$50.00	Repair table (landlord labour
Replace oven tray	$40.00	Replace oven tray
Replace armchair cover	$50.00	Replace armchair cover
Painting	$650.00	Painting
Cleaning	$220.00	Cleaning
Net award	$1,030.00
Bond	$2,800.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,030.00

Claims and awards for application 4738569 — net $1,030.00 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Replace broken mop

Amount: $20.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Replace broken mop

Repair table (landlord labour

Amount: $50.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repair table (landlord labour

Replace oven tray

Amount: $40.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Replace oven tray

Replace armchair cover

Amount: $50.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Replace armchair cover

Painting

Amount: $650.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Painting

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Property damage

Order

[The tenant/s] to pay Holmwood Real Estate Limited As Agent For Olivia Gilmore & Jordan Birchfield $1,030.00 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below:
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,800.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: • Holmwood Real Estate Limited As Agent For Olivia Gilmore & Jordan Birchfield: • $1,030.00 • [The tenant/s]: • $1,770.00

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Ms Laird and Ms Brown represented the landlord.
The landlord has applied for compensation and a refund of most of the bond, following the end of the tenancy.
The tenant accepted all the landlord’s claims except for two – the insurance excess on a claim for damage to kitchen cabinetry ($1,000.00) and a claim for the replacement of two chairs ($400.00).
I have allowed the claims accepted by the tenant by consent.
That said, had the tenant not consented, it is unlikely that the Tribunal would have found all the claims proved.
The landlord’s representative withdrew the claim for the insurance excess for the repair of kitchen cabinetry.
That the Tribunal can award the insurance excess does not mean that it automatically does so.
The damage shown in the photos produced in evidence appears minor. It has not been repaired as the insurance claim was only finalised yesterday.
Rather than dismiss the claim, I suggested that the landlord’s representative withdraw it. That means the claim can be made again.
However, the Tribunal would require proof that the work has been completed and proof of the actual repair cost.
I dismiss the claim for the replacement of two chairs.
The tenancy lasted for 3 months only. The photos produced in evidence do not show damage to the chair frames, only to the upholstery fabric.
The photos literally show a difference in fabric colour between black and white. The white fabric appears to have some mould spotting.
The tenant said the chairs were white at the start of the tenancy and in an area not often used. He said they were located in an area where there was direct sunlight.
The landlord has not proved that the tenant caused intentional or careless damage to the upholstery. I cannot reconcile the photographic evidence that shows such a dramatic colour change within such a short time.
I make no award of the filing fee as the landlord’s application is only partly successful.
The tenant sought a name suppression order. I allow that application as the tenant’s defence has been mostly successful – see section 95A of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

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 4738569 — net $1,030.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Replace broken mop	$20.00	Replace broken mop
Repair table (landlord labour	$50.00	Repair table (landlord labour
Replace oven tray	$40.00	Replace oven tray
Replace armchair cover	$50.00	Replace armchair cover
Painting	$650.00	Painting
Cleaning	$220.00	Cleaning
Net award	$1,030.00
Bond	$2,800.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,030.00

Claims and awards for application 4738569 — net $1,030.00 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Replace broken mop

Amount: $20.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Replace broken mop

Repair table (landlord labour

Amount: $50.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repair table (landlord labour

Replace oven tray

Amount: $40.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Replace oven tray

Replace armchair cover

Amount: $50.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Replace armchair cover

Painting

Amount: $650.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Painting

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Property damage

Order

[The tenant/s] to pay Holmwood Real Estate Limited As Agent For Olivia Gilmore & Jordan Birchfield $1,030.00 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below:
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,800.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: • Holmwood Real Estate Limited As Agent For Olivia Gilmore & Jordan Birchfield: • $1,030.00 • [The tenant/s]: • $1,770.00

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Ms Laird and Ms Brown represented the landlord.
The landlord has applied for compensation and a refund of most of the bond, following the end of the tenancy.
The tenant accepted all the landlord’s claims except for two – the insurance excess on a claim for damage to kitchen cabinetry ($1,000.00) and a claim for the replacement of two chairs ($400.00).
I have allowed the claims accepted by the tenant by consent.
That said, had the tenant not consented, it is unlikely that the Tribunal would have found all the claims proved.
The landlord’s representative withdrew the claim for the insurance excess for the repair of kitchen cabinetry.
That the Tribunal can award the insurance excess does not mean that it automatically does so.
The damage shown in the photos produced in evidence appears minor. It has not been repaired as the insurance claim was only finalised yesterday.
Rather than dismiss the claim, I suggested that the landlord’s representative withdraw it. That means the claim can be made again.
However, the Tribunal would require proof that the work has been completed and proof of the actual repair cost.
I dismiss the claim for the replacement of two chairs.
The tenancy lasted for 3 months only. The photos produced in evidence do not show damage to the chair frames, only to the upholstery fabric.
The photos literally show a difference in fabric colour between black and white. The white fabric appears to have some mould spotting.
The tenant said the chairs were white at the start of the tenancy and in an area not often used. He said they were located in an area where there was direct sunlight.
The landlord has not proved that the tenant caused intentional or careless damage to the upholstery. I cannot reconcile the photographic evidence that shows such a dramatic colour change within such a short time.
I make no award of the filing fee as the landlord’s application is only partly successful.
The tenant sought a name suppression order. I allow that application as the tenant’s defence has been mostly successful – see section 95A of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4738569 — Cleanliness

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4738569 — 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