What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4766357?

The tribunal order states: Carolyn Joanne Digby must pay Oxygen.Co.Nz Limited $9,131.73 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 4766357?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $736.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $400.52 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $717.74 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $155.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $3,942.86 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $4,089.17 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4766357?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4766357?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10078189-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4766357?

The tribunal order states: Carolyn Joanne Digby must pay Oxygen.Co.Nz Limited $9,131.73 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 4766357?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $736.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $400.52 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $717.74 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $155.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $3,942.86 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $4,089.17 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4766357?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4766357?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10078189-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

30 Neal Crescent, Onekawa, Napier 4110 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4766357 — Rent arrears

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4766357 — net $9,131.73 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$3,942.86	Rent arrears
Rubbish removal	$4,089.17	Rubbish removal
Wall repairs	$736.00	Wall repairs
Window repairs	$400.52	Window repairs
Glass repairs	$717.74	Glass repairs
Lock/key replacement	$155.00	Lock/key replacement
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$9,131.73
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$9,131.73

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

Before the hearing the tenant contacted Tenancy Services to advise that she was in Australia and asked that she be able to attend by teleconference. That request was approved on the basis that the tenant would need to provide a phone number on which she could be phoned for the hearing. The tenant did not do so and attempts to make contact with her on the numbers available on file was not successful.

This hearing concerns a tenancy which ended on 15 January 2024. The claim is significant and undue prejudice would be caused to the landlord if the hearing did not proceed today.

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?

On 11 September 2023 the landlord issued the tenant with a 90 day notice of termination, ending the tenancy on 11 December 2023 on the basis that the landlord wished to place the property on the market for sale following renovations.

The tenant requested that the termination date be extended, and the end date was extended by agreement to 15 January 2024.

The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.

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.

A final inspection was arranged for 15 January 2024. The property manager attended on that date, but the tenant and her flat mates were in the process of packing and we're not willing to have an inspection completed. The property manager’s evidence is that she attended the following day, the tenant became upset and left, having informed the property manager that she had taken everything she intended to from the property.

The property manager says that opportunity was given to the tenant to return and take any further belongings. Such arrangements were made with the tenant’s flatmate, who subsequently came back to the premises and removed other belongings.

On the basis of that evidence, I am satisfied that opportunity was given to the tenant to take from the premises what she wanted to at the end of the tenancy. There were some personal effects left by the tenant which are held at the Public Trust, which is the owner of the property. The tenant is aware of that and has been in communication with Public Trust directly.

The property manager arranged for a second hand dealer to visit the property and inspect the remaining goods. The assessment was that the remaining items had no value above the cost of storage and the landlord made arrangements for those remaining items to be removed and disposed of.

Based on the property manager’s evidence I am satisfied that the goods left at the premises by the tenant were appropriately dealt with by the landlord in terms of section 62A RTA.

Because the tenant did not meet her obligation to remove all items from the premises at the end of the tenancy, the landlord is entitled to be compensated for the cost of doing so. That cost is proved by the invoice from downsize.co.nz, provided by the landlord. The charge is high, but the invoice includes $1,500.00 in transfer station fees alone which indicates the quantity of material left by the tenant. I am satisfied that the amount of the invoice represents an out of pocket expense to the owner, which it is entitled to be reimbursed for.

The tenant did not return the keys. The landlord is entitled to be reimbursed the cost of risk rekeying the premises, which is proved by the Lockwise invoice provided.

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.

The photographic evidence provided by the landlord shows that windows and louvres were broken during the tenancy. As that damage occurred during the tenancy and was more than fair wear and tear, in the absence of contrary evidence from the tenant, the Tribunal must proceed on the basis that it is damage the tenant is responsible for. The repair cost is approved by the invoice provided.

Because those windows were broken, after the tenant vacated the premises were not secure and the landlord was required to secure them until the re glazing work could be done. I am satisfied that the resulting cost was due to the damage caused by the tenant and the landlord should be reimbursed. The cost is proved by the invoice provided.

Photographs provided by the landlord also show that there were holes caused to walls in the premises. I am satisfied that the damage occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear, so the landlord is entitled to be compensated the repair cost which has proven by the invoice provided.

I note that no claim is bought for cleaning costs and the claim for wall damage repair is only to have the surface reinstated to a paintable condition. That is appropriate as other work would be part of the landlord’s refurbishment costs.

Because Oxygen.Co.Nz Limited has succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4766357 — net $9,131.73 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$3,942.86	Rent arrears
Rubbish removal	$4,089.17	Rubbish removal
Wall repairs	$736.00	Wall repairs
Window repairs	$400.52	Window repairs
Glass repairs	$717.74	Glass repairs
Lock/key replacement	$155.00	Lock/key replacement
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$9,131.73
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$9,131.73

Order

Carolyn Joanne Digby must pay Oxygen.Co.Nz Limited $9,131.73 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $930.00 (3600295-006) to Oxygen.Co.Nz Limited immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not attend.
Before the hearing the tenant contacted Tenancy Services to advise that she was in Australia and asked that she be able to attend by teleconference. That request was approved on the basis that the tenant would need to provide a phone number on which she could be phoned for the hearing. The tenant did not do so and attempts to make contact with her on the numbers available on file was not successful.
This hearing concerns a tenancy which ended on 15 January 2024. The claim is significant and undue prejudice would be caused to the landlord if the hearing did not proceed today.
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?

On 11 September 2023 the landlord issued the tenant with a 90 day notice of termination, ending the tenancy on 11 December 2023 on the basis that the landlord wished to place the property on the market for sale following renovations.
The tenant requested that the termination date be extended, and the end date was extended by agreement to 15 January 2024.
The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.

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.
A final inspection was arranged for 15 January 2024. The property manager attended on that date, but the tenant and her flat mates were in the process of packing and we're not willing to have an inspection completed. The property manager’s evidence is that she attended the following day, the tenant became upset and left, having informed the property manager that she had taken everything she intended to from the property.
The property manager says that opportunity was given to the tenant to return and take any further belongings. Such arrangements were made with the tenant’s flatmate, who subsequently came back to the premises and removed other belongings.
On the basis of that evidence, I am satisfied that opportunity was given to the tenant to take from the premises what she wanted to at the end of the tenancy. There were some personal effects left by the tenant which are held at the Public Trust, which is the owner of the property. The tenant is aware of that and has been in communication with Public Trust directly.
The property manager arranged for a second hand dealer to visit the property and inspect the remaining goods. The assessment was that the remaining items had no value above the cost of storage and the landlord made arrangements for those remaining items to be removed and disposed of.
Based on the property manager’s evidence I am satisfied that the goods left at the premises by the tenant were appropriately dealt with by the landlord in terms of section 62A RTA.
Because the tenant did not meet her obligation to remove all items from the premises at the end of the tenancy, the landlord is entitled to be compensated for the cost of doing so. That cost is proved by the invoice from downsize.co.nz, provided by the landlord. The charge is high, but the invoice includes $1,500.00 in transfer station fees alone which indicates the quantity of material left by the tenant. I am satisfied that the amount of the invoice represents an out of pocket expense to the owner, which it is entitled to be reimbursed for.
The tenant did not return the keys. The landlord is entitled to be reimbursed the cost of risk rekeying the premises, which is proved by the Lockwise invoice provided.

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.
The photographic evidence provided by the landlord shows that windows and louvres were broken during the tenancy. As that damage occurred during the tenancy and was more than fair wear and tear, in the absence of contrary evidence from the tenant, the Tribunal must proceed on the basis that it is damage the tenant is responsible for. The repair cost is approved by the invoice provided.
Because those windows were broken, after the tenant vacated the premises were not secure and the landlord was required to secure them until the re glazing work could be done. I am satisfied that the resulting cost was due to the damage caused by the tenant and the landlord should be reimbursed. The cost is proved by the invoice provided.
Photographs provided by the landlord also show that there were holes caused to walls in the premises. I am satisfied that the damage occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear, so the landlord is entitled to be compensated the repair cost which has proven by the invoice provided.
I note that no claim is bought for cleaning costs and the claim for wall damage repair is only to have the surface reinstated to a paintable condition. That is appropriate as other work would be part of the landlord’s refurbishment costs.
Because Oxygen.Co.Nz Limited has succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4766357 — Rent arrears at 30 Neal Crescent, Onekawa, Napier 4110

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4766357 — Rent arrears at 30 Neal Crescent, Onekawa, Napier 4110

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