What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4749531 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] to pay Robinson Property Management Limited (T/A Quinovic

How much money was awarded in case 4749531?

Cleaning: $428.00 awarded to landlord; Compensation: Invalid notice to term…: $600.00 awarded to tenant; Rent Arrears: $1,459.12 awarded to landlord; Kitchen Benchtop: Excess: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $179.01 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4749531?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage, Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4749531?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10320413-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4749531 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] to pay Robinson Property Management Limited (T/A Quinovic

How much money was awarded in case 4749531?

Cleaning: $428.00 awarded to landlord; Compensation: Invalid notice to term…: $600.00 awarded to tenant; Rent Arrears: $1,459.12 awarded to landlord; Kitchen Benchtop: Excess: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $179.01 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4749531?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage, Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4749531?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10320413-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4749531 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4749531 — net $1,966.13 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears	$1,459.12		Rent arrears
Carpet Cleaning	$428.00		Carpet Cleaning
Water rates	$179.01		Water rates
Repairs: Kitchen benchtop: excess	$500.00		Repairs: Kitchen benchtop: excess
Compensation: Invalid notice to terminate		$600.00	Invalid notice to terminate
Total award	$2,566.13	$600.00
Net award	$1,966.13
Bond	$2,400.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,966.13

Order

[The tenant/s] to pay Robinson Property Management Limited (T/A Quinovic Property Management) - As Agent For Rex Davanzo $1,966.13 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,400.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: Robinson Property Management Limited (T/A Quinovic Property Management) - As Agent For Rex Davanzo: $1,966.13 [The tenant/s]: $433.87

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The tenant counterclaimed for compensation and return of the bond.
A party who brings a claim to the Tenancy Tribunal must prove on the balance of probabilities (more likely than not) that their version of events took place. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden of proof.
In the decision that follows I may not have referred to all the oral testimony and other evidence presented, but the parties should know it has been considered.

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

The tenancy ended on 19 November 2023. The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amounts owing at the end of the tenancy are as ordered. The rent summary reflected prior compensation to the tenant via rent credits.

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 (“RTA”).
The tenant has the carpets professional cleaned. However, there were a number of stains that required further treatment at a cost to the landlord. These were evidenced via photo and costs established by an invoice. I award the cost of stain removal but decline the second line item for upholstery cleaning as this is not proven as a tenant liability.
A chair was provided as a chattel. The tenant stored it in the garage. It was damaged at the end of the tenancy and the landlord sought $50.00 compensation for a second-hand replacement that was purchased to replace it. Having reviewed the before and after photos I do not consider the chair had any economic life left and decline to compensate the replacement cost.
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.
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.
“Fair wear” is deterioration caused by the reasonable use of the premises. “Fair tear” is deterioration caused by the ordinary operation of the forces of nature. Importantly, intentional or careless damage are not fair wear and tear. The landlord must prove that damage is beyond fair wear and tear for compensation.
The kitchen benchtop was damaged during the tenancy. The damage appears to have been caused by the placing of a hot pot on the Formica top, leaving an obvious circular burn. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The owner has successfully made an insurance claim and while the owner has incurred a $2,500.00 excess per the insurance policy, the awarded compensation is at the $500.00 excess amount, as stated in the tenancy agreement. See s 13A RTA.
The landlord withdrew the claim for carpet replacement.
I have taken 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 kitchen benchtop at the start of the tenancy. I am satisfied the reduced excess of $500.00 is lesser than any depreciated replacement cost. Tenant application
The tenant raised historic issues regarding flood damage and remediation. I am satisfied this was adequately addressed at the time with the rent credit and it would be inappropriate to revisit that post-tenancy.
The second ground for compensation raised by the tenant regarded advice sent by the landlord via email on 4 September 2023. That advice was that the owner would not be renewing the fixed-term tenancy. This was never formalised and only retracted on 11 October 2023, again very briefly via email. No subsequent follow-up by the landlord occurred, but in fairness it appears that at that time the email was the preferred means of communication.
The landlord acknowledged the mistake in sending the end of tenancy advice on 4 September 2023. She said it was unintentional. It set in train a series of events that meant the tenant left at the end of the fixed-term via her own 28-day notice.
I find grounds for compensation have been established. However, the sum awarded balances the landlord failure with the tenant’s lack of action to retain the tenancy during this time. She had previously asserted (correctly) her tenant rights for compensation and also showed awareness of the Tribunal as recourse for disputes. She explained the reasons for this.
Given the respective actions (or lack of), I award the equivalent of one week rent, $600.00, as compensation for the invalid notice and subsequent impact on the tenant. Any failure of the landlord is not considered intentional. Filing fee
Each applicant is to carry their cost of filing. Suppression
Section 95A RTA states regarding suppression orders that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
Further, the Tribunal may, on the application of any party to proceedings or on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that all or part of the evidence given or the name or any identifying particulars of any witness or party not be published.
The tenant requested suppression at the hearing. Having regard to the nature of the disputes, and the inflated claims of the landlord that were only revised down shortly before the hearing, I consider it appropriate to make a suppression order. Any public interest in this dispute is lesser than the tenant’s interest in having suppression given she continues to be an active renter. The landlord acknowledged the tenant was a good tenant.
Tenant suppression is ordered.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4749531 — net $1,966.13 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears	$1,459.12		Rent arrears
Carpet Cleaning	$428.00		Carpet Cleaning
Water rates	$179.01		Water rates
Repairs: Kitchen benchtop: excess	$500.00		Repairs: Kitchen benchtop: excess
Compensation: Invalid notice to terminate		$600.00	Invalid notice to terminate
Total award	$2,566.13	$600.00
Net award	$1,966.13
Bond	$2,400.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,966.13

Order

[The tenant/s] to pay Robinson Property Management Limited (T/A Quinovic Property Management) - As Agent For Rex Davanzo $1,966.13 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,400.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: Robinson Property Management Limited (T/A Quinovic Property Management) - As Agent For Rex Davanzo: $1,966.13 [The tenant/s]: $433.87

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The tenant counterclaimed for compensation and return of the bond.
A party who brings a claim to the Tenancy Tribunal must prove on the balance of probabilities (more likely than not) that their version of events took place. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden of proof.
In the decision that follows I may not have referred to all the oral testimony and other evidence presented, but the parties should know it has been considered.

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

The tenancy ended on 19 November 2023. The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amounts owing at the end of the tenancy are as ordered. The rent summary reflected prior compensation to the tenant via rent credits.

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 (“RTA”).
The tenant has the carpets professional cleaned. However, there were a number of stains that required further treatment at a cost to the landlord. These were evidenced via photo and costs established by an invoice. I award the cost of stain removal but decline the second line item for upholstery cleaning as this is not proven as a tenant liability.
A chair was provided as a chattel. The tenant stored it in the garage. It was damaged at the end of the tenancy and the landlord sought $50.00 compensation for a second-hand replacement that was purchased to replace it. Having reviewed the before and after photos I do not consider the chair had any economic life left and decline to compensate the replacement cost.
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.
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.
“Fair wear” is deterioration caused by the reasonable use of the premises. “Fair tear” is deterioration caused by the ordinary operation of the forces of nature. Importantly, intentional or careless damage are not fair wear and tear. The landlord must prove that damage is beyond fair wear and tear for compensation.
The kitchen benchtop was damaged during the tenancy. The damage appears to have been caused by the placing of a hot pot on the Formica top, leaving an obvious circular burn. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The owner has successfully made an insurance claim and while the owner has incurred a $2,500.00 excess per the insurance policy, the awarded compensation is at the $500.00 excess amount, as stated in the tenancy agreement. See s 13A RTA.
The landlord withdrew the claim for carpet replacement.
I have taken 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 kitchen benchtop at the start of the tenancy. I am satisfied the reduced excess of $500.00 is lesser than any depreciated replacement cost. Tenant application
The tenant raised historic issues regarding flood damage and remediation. I am satisfied this was adequately addressed at the time with the rent credit and it would be inappropriate to revisit that post-tenancy.
The second ground for compensation raised by the tenant regarded advice sent by the landlord via email on 4 September 2023. That advice was that the owner would not be renewing the fixed-term tenancy. This was never formalised and only retracted on 11 October 2023, again very briefly via email. No subsequent follow-up by the landlord occurred, but in fairness it appears that at that time the email was the preferred means of communication.
The landlord acknowledged the mistake in sending the end of tenancy advice on 4 September 2023. She said it was unintentional. It set in train a series of events that meant the tenant left at the end of the fixed-term via her own 28-day notice.
I find grounds for compensation have been established. However, the sum awarded balances the landlord failure with the tenant’s lack of action to retain the tenancy during this time. She had previously asserted (correctly) her tenant rights for compensation and also showed awareness of the Tribunal as recourse for disputes. She explained the reasons for this.
Given the respective actions (or lack of), I award the equivalent of one week rent, $600.00, as compensation for the invalid notice and subsequent impact on the tenant. Any failure of the landlord is not considered intentional. Filing fee
Each applicant is to carry their cost of filing. Suppression
Section 95A RTA states regarding suppression orders that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
Further, the Tribunal may, on the application of any party to proceedings or on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that all or part of the evidence given or the name or any identifying particulars of any witness or party not be published.
The tenant requested suppression at the hearing. Having regard to the nature of the disputes, and the inflated claims of the landlord that were only revised down shortly before the hearing, I consider it appropriate to make a suppression order. Any public interest in this dispute is lesser than the tenant’s interest in having suppression given she continues to be an active renter. The landlord acknowledged the tenant was a good tenant.
Tenant suppression is ordered.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4749531 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4749531 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

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

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

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