What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4767419 about?

The tribunal order states: Richard Thompson must pay [The landlord/s] $575.44 immediately, calculated

How much money was awarded in case 4767419?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Owed: $2,515.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4767419?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4767419?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10139857-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4767419 about?

The tribunal order states: Richard Thompson must pay [The landlord/s] $575.44 immediately, calculated

How much money was awarded in case 4767419?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Owed: $2,515.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4767419?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4767419?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10139857-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4767419 — Tenancy dispute

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4767419 — net $575.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent owed to 27 October 2023	$2,515.00	Rent owed to 27 October 2023
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$575.44
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$575.44

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.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 27 October 2023. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy. The tenant disputed the amount owed, because he was sure I had not taken the rent he paid in advance into account. I explained that the rent in advance was used up during the tenancy. I find the landlord had the best information about rent arrears. The amount owed is proved.

Did the tenant comply with his obligations at the end of the tenancy?

At the end of the tenancy the tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and remove all rubbish. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).

The landlord said the apartment was not left reasonably clean and tidy. The tenant did not agree, saying he forgot to clean the microwave but otherwise the apartment was cleaner than when he moved in. This is the landlord’s claim to prove. I have not been provided with any photos showing the need for additional cleaning after the end of the tenancy. This claim is dismissed.

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.

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 claimed the cost of attaching the toilet roll holder to the wall. The tenant said this became loose during the tenancy. This is the landlord’s claim to prove. It seems most likely to me this was a maintenance issue rather than damage. The claim is dismissed.

There is a claim for a replacement toilet seat. The tenant agreed this was damaged during the tenancy. He said his 10 year old son copied something from the internet and lit a candle that damaged the toilet seat. The tenant accepted responsibility for the damage during the hearing. Despite this, I am not persuaded I should allow the claim for damage. It seems most likely to me the damage was accidental, given that a child caused it and there was no other damage during the tenancy. This claim is dismissed.

In any event, I would not have allowed the claim for the toilet seat because of betterment and depreciation. The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached his obligations, and should not be better or worse off. To calculate depreciation I must know the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. The photos from the start of the tenancy show a mid range toilet seat in a reasonable condition. I have not been provided with any proof of age for the toilet seat, which means I cannot calculate depreciation. Other orders

Because the landlord has mostly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

The landlord’s application for suppression is allowed because the landlord is the most successful party. The tenant’s name will be published because there is public interest where there has been a breach of the RTA.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4767419 — net $575.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent owed to 27 October 2023	$2,515.00	Rent owed to 27 October 2023
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$575.44
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$575.44

Order

Richard Thompson must pay [The landlord/s] $575.44 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,960.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.
All other claims are dismissed.

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.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 27 October 2023. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy. The tenant disputed the amount owed, because he was sure I had not taken the rent he paid in advance into account. I explained that the rent in advance was used up during the tenancy. I find the landlord had the best information about rent arrears. The amount owed is proved.

Did the tenant comply with his obligations at the end of the tenancy?

At the end of the tenancy the tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and remove all rubbish. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
The landlord said the apartment was not left reasonably clean and tidy. The tenant did not agree, saying he forgot to clean the microwave but otherwise the apartment was cleaner than when he moved in. This is the landlord’s claim to prove. I have not been provided with any photos showing the need for additional cleaning after the end of the tenancy. This claim is dismissed.

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.
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 claimed the cost of attaching the toilet roll holder to the wall. The tenant said this became loose during the tenancy. This is the landlord’s claim to prove. It seems most likely to me this was a maintenance issue rather than damage. The claim is dismissed.
There is a claim for a replacement toilet seat. The tenant agreed this was damaged during the tenancy. He said his 10 year old son copied something from the internet and lit a candle that damaged the toilet seat. The tenant accepted responsibility for the damage during the hearing. Despite this, I am not persuaded I should allow the claim for damage. It seems most likely to me the damage was accidental, given that a child caused it and there was no other damage during the tenancy. This claim is dismissed.
In any event, I would not have allowed the claim for the toilet seat because of betterment and depreciation. The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached his obligations, and should not be better or worse off. To calculate depreciation I must know the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. The photos from the start of the tenancy show a mid range toilet seat in a reasonable condition. I have not been provided with any proof of age for the toilet seat, which means I cannot calculate depreciation. Other orders
Because the landlord has mostly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
The landlord’s application for suppression is allowed because the landlord is the most successful party. The tenant’s name will be published because there is public interest where there has been a breach of the RTA.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4767419 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4767419 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Did the tenant comply with his 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

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Did the tenant comply with his 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