What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4745229 about?

The tribunal order states: The landlord’s name and details are suppressed.

How much money was awarded in case 4745229?

Cleaning: $172.50 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $250.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $130.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $270.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $490.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Oven Knob: $26.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Smoke Alarms: $168.64 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4745229?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness, Smoke alarms.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4745229?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9932404-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4745229 about?

The tribunal order states: The landlord’s name and details are suppressed.

How much money was awarded in case 4745229?

Cleaning: $172.50 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $250.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $130.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $270.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $490.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Oven Knob: $26.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Smoke Alarms: $168.64 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4745229?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness, Smoke alarms.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4745229?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9932404-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

11A Limbrick Street, Terrace End, Palmerston North 4410 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4745229 — Property damage

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4745229 — net $1,707.14 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Carpet Cleaning: upstairs bedroom	$172.50	Carpet Cleaning: upstairs bedroom
Cleaning	$250.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$200.00	Rubbish removal
Lawns and Garden work	$270.00	Lawns and Garden work
Replace furnishings: oven knob	$26.00	Replace furnishings: oven knob
Replace smoke alarms	$168.64	Replace smoke alarms
Repairs: wall and ceiling damage	$490.00	Repairs: wall and ceiling damage
Electrical fittings replacement/repair: bedroom light and bulbs	$130.00	Electrical fittings replacement/repair: bedroom light and bulbs
Net award	$1,707.14
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,707.14

Order

The landlord’s name and details are suppressed.
The landlord’s application and supporting documents are to be treated as served on the tenant on 15 December 2023
Harley Tamihana must pay [The landlord/s] $1,707.14 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below. DescriptionLandlord Carpet Cleaning: upstairs bedroom$172.50 Cleaning$250.00 Rubbish removal$200.00 Lawns and Garden work$270.00 Replace furnishings: oven knob$26.00 Replace smoke alarms$168.64 Repairs: wall and ceiling damage$490.00 Electrical fittings replacement/repair: bedroom light and bulbs $130.00 Total award$1,707.14 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$1,707.14

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing.
The tenant did not attend the hearing.
The landlord has applied for compensation following the end of the tenancy. Service
The landlord made application to the Tribunal on 20 November 2023 which was more than two months after the end of the tenancy. This means that the application and other documents required to be served on the tenant must be posted to an address that the tenant has given to the landlord in writing within the last two months, or served in person on the tenant, or delivered to the tenant's place of residence, or given to an authorised agent of the tenant. See section 91A(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
The landlord does not have a contact address for the tenant that has been given to them in writing within the last two months. The tenant provided an email address in the tenancy agreement which it states can be used as an address for service. A copy of the landlord’s application and supporting documentation have been sent to that email address, together with notifications regarding this hearing. The landlord gave evidence at the hearing that its debt collection agency has communicated with the tenant at the email address.
I am satisfied that in these circumstances all reasonable efforts have been made to serve the application and corresponding documentation on the tenant. I am satisfied that emailing and texting to a longstanding email address and phone number are steps that have brought, or are likely to have brought, notice of the application to the tenant’s attention.
In accordance with section 91B(2)(b) RTA, I direct that the landlord’s application and supporting documents be treated as served on the tenant on 15 December 2023 and that the landlord’s application is to proceed as if it had been served on the tenant.

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 and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The landlord provided photographic evidence that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish.
There is no definition of “reasonably clean and tidy" in the RTA. This can make it difficult when people have different understandings of what it means. Tribunal and District Court decisions over the years have said that it means: a. To the standard an average reasonable bystander would consider reasonable. b. Not commercially clean, spotless, or to hotel standard. c. The standard will vary according to the age and condition of the premises so the better and newer the premises, the higher the standard. d. Not necessarily to the standard where the landlord would be happy to rent it out to a new tenant.
There is no requirement that each and every individual item in the premises be left “reasonably” clean and tidy, only an overall obligation in relation to the tenancy premises.
A landlord may often decide to clean premises to a higher standard than that required from the outgoing tenant before re-tenanting or selling (for example, rigorously cleaning all walls, ceilings, lightshades, skirtings, window and door sills, plugs and drains, silicone edging, behind fittings and appliances, and the outside of windows and of the house.
However, a landlord is only required to provide tenancy premises in a “reasonable state of cleanliness” (see s45(1)(a) RTA) so the next tenant cannot insist that premises are presented to a higher standard. If a landlord chooses to do so, perhaps to attract tenants, then that is a business decision that they are entitled to make at their cost.
For these reasons the amounts awarded for cleaning and gardening are less than the amounts claimed by the landlord.
The landlord had to replace light bulbs, a light fitting in the main bedroom, an oven doorknob and three smoke alarms.
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. 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.
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 landlord provided photographic evidence that the following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. There were holes on both sides of an upstairs bedroom door. b. There were two holes in the hallway walls near the front entrance. c. One bedroom had holes in the ceiling.
As the amount claimed for the repair of all of the damage was less than the insurance excess or four weeks’ rent, it is not necessary to determine whether the damage was careless or intentional.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved.
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4745229 — net $1,707.14 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Carpet Cleaning: upstairs bedroom	$172.50	Carpet Cleaning: upstairs bedroom
Cleaning	$250.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$200.00	Rubbish removal
Lawns and Garden work	$270.00	Lawns and Garden work
Replace furnishings: oven knob	$26.00	Replace furnishings: oven knob
Replace smoke alarms	$168.64	Replace smoke alarms
Repairs: wall and ceiling damage	$490.00	Repairs: wall and ceiling damage
Electrical fittings replacement/repair: bedroom light and bulbs	$130.00	Electrical fittings replacement/repair: bedroom light and bulbs
Net award	$1,707.14
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,707.14

Order

The landlord’s name and details are suppressed.
The landlord’s application and supporting documents are to be treated as served on the tenant on 15 December 2023
Harley Tamihana must pay [The landlord/s] $1,707.14 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below. DescriptionLandlord Carpet Cleaning: upstairs bedroom$172.50 Cleaning$250.00 Rubbish removal$200.00 Lawns and Garden work$270.00 Replace furnishings: oven knob$26.00 Replace smoke alarms$168.64 Repairs: wall and ceiling damage$490.00 Electrical fittings replacement/repair: bedroom light and bulbs $130.00 Total award$1,707.14 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$1,707.14

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing.
The tenant did not attend the hearing.
The landlord has applied for compensation following the end of the tenancy. Service
The landlord made application to the Tribunal on 20 November 2023 which was more than two months after the end of the tenancy. This means that the application and other documents required to be served on the tenant must be posted to an address that the tenant has given to the landlord in writing within the last two months, or served in person on the tenant, or delivered to the tenant's place of residence, or given to an authorised agent of the tenant. See section 91A(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
The landlord does not have a contact address for the tenant that has been given to them in writing within the last two months. The tenant provided an email address in the tenancy agreement which it states can be used as an address for service. A copy of the landlord’s application and supporting documentation have been sent to that email address, together with notifications regarding this hearing. The landlord gave evidence at the hearing that its debt collection agency has communicated with the tenant at the email address.
I am satisfied that in these circumstances all reasonable efforts have been made to serve the application and corresponding documentation on the tenant. I am satisfied that emailing and texting to a longstanding email address and phone number are steps that have brought, or are likely to have brought, notice of the application to the tenant’s attention.
In accordance with section 91B(2)(b) RTA, I direct that the landlord’s application and supporting documents be treated as served on the tenant on 15 December 2023 and that the landlord’s application is to proceed as if it had been served on the tenant.

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 and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The landlord provided photographic evidence that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish.
There is no definition of “reasonably clean and tidy" in the RTA. This can make it difficult when people have different understandings of what it means. Tribunal and District Court decisions over the years have said that it means: a. To the standard an average reasonable bystander would consider reasonable. b. Not commercially clean, spotless, or to hotel standard. c. The standard will vary according to the age and condition of the premises so the better and newer the premises, the higher the standard. d. Not necessarily to the standard where the landlord would be happy to rent it out to a new tenant.
There is no requirement that each and every individual item in the premises be left “reasonably” clean and tidy, only an overall obligation in relation to the tenancy premises.
A landlord may often decide to clean premises to a higher standard than that required from the outgoing tenant before re-tenanting or selling (for example, rigorously cleaning all walls, ceilings, lightshades, skirtings, window and door sills, plugs and drains, silicone edging, behind fittings and appliances, and the outside of windows and of the house.
However, a landlord is only required to provide tenancy premises in a “reasonable state of cleanliness” (see s45(1)(a) RTA) so the next tenant cannot insist that premises are presented to a higher standard. If a landlord chooses to do so, perhaps to attract tenants, then that is a business decision that they are entitled to make at their cost.
For these reasons the amounts awarded for cleaning and gardening are less than the amounts claimed by the landlord.
The landlord had to replace light bulbs, a light fitting in the main bedroom, an oven doorknob and three smoke alarms.
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. 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.
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 landlord provided photographic evidence that the following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. There were holes on both sides of an upstairs bedroom door. b. There were two holes in the hallway walls near the front entrance. c. One bedroom had holes in the ceiling.
As the amount claimed for the repair of all of the damage was less than the insurance excess or four weeks’ rent, it is not necessary to determine whether the damage was careless or intentional.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved.
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4745229 — Property damage at 11A Limbrick Street, Terrace End, Palmerston North 4410

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4745229 — Property damage at 11A Limbrick Street, Terrace End, Palmerston North 4410

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