What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4766958 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

How much money was awarded in case 4766958?

The reconciled net award was $20.44.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4766958?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4766958?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9933964-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4766958 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

How much money was awarded in case 4766958?

The reconciled net award was $20.44.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4766958?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4766958?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9933964-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

31A St Andrews Terrace, Saint Andrews, Hamilton 3200 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4766958 — Cleanliness

Reasons

The tenancy ended on 14 November 2023.

The tenant’s application seeks refund of the bond.

The hearing took place by phone on 8 February 2024. [The tenant/s] attended the hearing and was assisted by his partner [The tenant's partner]. Mr & Mrs McBride also attended the hearing.

Mr McBride submitted that he should be entitled to retain $237.00 from the bond for a change of locks and replacement of a garage door remote.

[The tenant's partner] provided a detailed affidavit and oral evidence about what she did with the keys and the garage door remote at the end of the tenancy.

[The tenant's partner] submitted that after finishing cleaning she returned to the property late in the evening on 14 November to leave the keys behind, as agreed with the landlord. She submitted that she left two keys and the garage door remote on the kitchen bench near the microwave. She exited through the front door and locked the door using a spare key. She then posted that spare key back to the landlord.

Mr McBride submitted that the two keys and the garage door remote were not in the property when they entered the next morning. Mr McBride provided an affidavit from Mrs McBride and from their cleaner, attesting to the fact that the keys and remote were not there. Mr McBride had the lock changed promptly.

Mr McBride received the key that was posted back. The other two keys and the garage door remote have not been found.

It is impossible to reconcile the evidence of the two parties, and it is impossible to know what happened to the keys and the remote control.

The landlord has the burden of proof.

[The tenant's partner]’s affidavit states that she is a lawyer who has her own practice in [city]. At the hearing [The tenant's partner] emphasised the serious consequences for her of knowingly swearing a false affidavit.

Mr McBride acknowledged this, and he accepted that [The tenant's partner]’s affidavit is true and correct. He accepts that [The tenant's partner] did place the keys and remote control on the kitchen bench and that she did then leave the property through the front door. Mr McBride submitted that he does not know what may have happened after that, and the affidavit does not speak to that.

I acknowledge that the relationship between the landlord and tenant was strained at the end of the tenancy.

However, it seems to me to be extremely unlikely that [The tenant's partner] would leave the keys and remote on the bench, leave the property, and then return sometime during the night of 14/15 November to take the keys and remote away.

Therefore, I find that it is not proven that the tenant failed to leave the keys and remote in the premises at the end of the tenancy, which was the agreed means of returning the keys to the landlord at the end of the tenancy.

The tenant met his legal duty and is not liable for the cost of changing the lock and replacing the remote control.

The tenant is entitled to the bond in full. The tenant has been successful in this application, and I must also award the tenant the filing fee for this application 1 . 1 Section 104(2)(a) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”)

The tenant sought name suppression. The tenant has substantially succeeded in the proceedings, and I will grant name suppression on that basis 2 .

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of () to immediately.
David McBride is to pay [The tenant/s] $20.44 immediately, being the filing fee for this application.

Reasons

The tenancy ended on 14 November 2023.
The tenant’s application seeks refund of the bond.
The hearing took place by phone on 8 February 2024. [The tenant/s] attended the hearing and was assisted by his partner [The tenant's partner]. Mr & Mrs McBride also attended the hearing.
Mr McBride submitted that he should be entitled to retain $237.00 from the bond for a change of locks and replacement of a garage door remote.
[The tenant's partner] provided a detailed affidavit and oral evidence about what she did with the keys and the garage door remote at the end of the tenancy.
[The tenant's partner] submitted that after finishing cleaning she returned to the property late in the evening on 14 November to leave the keys behind, as agreed with the landlord. She submitted that she left two keys and the garage door remote on the kitchen bench near the microwave. She exited through the front door and locked the door using a spare key. She then posted that spare key back to the landlord.
Mr McBride submitted that the two keys and the garage door remote were not in the property when they entered the next morning. Mr McBride provided an affidavit from Mrs McBride and from their cleaner, attesting to the fact that the keys and remote were not there. Mr McBride had the lock changed promptly.
Mr McBride received the key that was posted back. The other two keys and the garage door remote have not been found.
It is impossible to reconcile the evidence of the two parties, and it is impossible to know what happened to the keys and the remote control.
The landlord has the burden of proof.
[The tenant's partner]’s affidavit states that she is a lawyer who has her own practice in [city]. At the hearing [The tenant's partner] emphasised the serious consequences for her of knowingly swearing a false affidavit.
Mr McBride acknowledged this, and he accepted that [The tenant's partner]’s affidavit is true and correct. He accepts that [The tenant's partner] did place the keys and remote control on the kitchen bench and that she did then leave the property through the front door. Mr McBride submitted that he does not know what may have happened after that, and the affidavit does not speak to that.
I acknowledge that the relationship between the landlord and tenant was strained at the end of the tenancy.
However, it seems to me to be extremely unlikely that [The tenant's partner] would leave the keys and remote on the bench, leave the property, and then return sometime during the night of 14/15 November to take the keys and remote away.
Therefore, I find that it is not proven that the tenant failed to leave the keys and remote in the premises at the end of the tenancy, which was the agreed means of returning the keys to the landlord at the end of the tenancy.
The tenant met his legal duty and is not liable for the cost of changing the lock and replacing the remote control.
The tenant is entitled to the bond in full. The tenant has been successful in this application, and I must also award the tenant the filing fee for this application 1 . 1 Section 104(2)(a) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”)
The tenant sought name suppression. The tenant has substantially succeeded in the proceedings, and I will grant name suppression on that basis 2 .

Tenancy Tribunal case 4766958 — Cleanliness at 31A St Andrews Terrace, Saint Andrews, Hamilton 3200

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4766958 — Cleanliness at 31A St Andrews Terrace, Saint Andrews, Hamilton 3200

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