What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4764919?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4764919?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4764919?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4764919?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10257585-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4764919?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4764919?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4764919?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4764919?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10257585-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

54 Riverside Road, Frankton, Queenstown 9300 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4764919 — Property damage

Reasons

This matter was part heard on 22 February 2024. The tenant did not attend that hearing. Various orders were made by the Tribunal. The hearing was adjourned to allow the landlord to conduct further discussions with its insurers relating to damage to a carpet.

The landlord attended the hearing today. The tenant did not attend.

The landlord has applied for compensation following the end of the tenancy.

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. The landlord has insurance. The excess on the policy is $1,000.00. The insurance company considered there to be two separate claims with an excess applicable to each.

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: Damage to the carpet, both upstairs and downstairs. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The landlord seeks compensation of $11,400.00 to replace the carpet throughout the house. The landlord provided photos of the damage and quotes from the carpet retailer.

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 item at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. The carpet was between 15 and 20 years old. Carpet in a rental property has a limited life span. The IRD depreciation schedule suggests that a carpet in a rental property has an estimated useful life of 15.5 years. The carpet was at least that old. The depreciated value of the carpet is nil. In those circumstances, I make no order for compensation.

Order

The application is dismissed.

Reasons

This matter was part heard on 22 February 2024. The tenant did not attend that hearing. Various orders were made by the Tribunal. The hearing was adjourned to allow the landlord to conduct further discussions with its insurers relating to damage to a carpet.
The landlord attended the hearing today. The tenant did not attend.
The landlord has applied for compensation following the end of the tenancy.

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. The landlord has insurance. The excess on the policy is $1,000.00. The insurance company considered there to be two separate claims with an excess applicable to each.
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: Damage to the carpet, both upstairs and downstairs. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord seeks compensation of $11,400.00 to replace the carpet throughout the house. The landlord provided photos of the damage and quotes from the carpet retailer.
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 item at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. The carpet was between 15 and 20 years old. Carpet in a rental property has a limited life span. The IRD depreciation schedule suggests that a carpet in a rental property has an estimated useful life of 15.5 years. The carpet was at least that old. The depreciated value of the carpet is nil. In those circumstances, I make no order for compensation.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4764919 — Property damage at 54 Riverside Road, Frankton, Queenstown 9300

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4764919 — Property damage at 54 Riverside Road, Frankton, Queenstown 9300

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions