What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4771677 about?

The tribunal order states: Ritihia Enoka must pay [The landlord/s] $5,787.01 immediately, calculated as

How much money was awarded in case 4771677?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $6,578.57 awarded to landlord; Replace Kitchen Taps: $112.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Missing Door Handles: $126.00 awarded to landlord; To Walls In Lounge And Dining Room: $500.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4771677?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4771677?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10040632-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4771677 about?

The tribunal order states: Ritihia Enoka must pay [The landlord/s] $5,787.01 immediately, calculated as

How much money was awarded in case 4771677?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $6,578.57 awarded to landlord; Replace Kitchen Taps: $112.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Missing Door Handles: $126.00 awarded to landlord; To Walls In Lounge And Dining Room: $500.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4771677?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4771677?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10040632-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

7 Enfield Street, Nawton, Hamilton 3200 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4771677 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4771677 — net $5,687.01 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 18 January 2024	$6,578.57	Rent arrears to 18 January 2024
Repairs: replace kitchen taps	$112.00	Repairs: replace kitchen taps
Repairs: replace missing door handles	$126.00	Repairs: replace missing door handles
Repairs: to walls in lounge and dining room	$500.00	Repairs: to walls in lounge and dining room
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$5,687.01
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,687.01

Ms [redacted] appeared for the landlord. There was no appearance by the tenant.

On 11 May 2023, there was a transfer of an existing tenancy to the tenant. A new agreement was produced, and a tenancy inspection conducted. The agreement and inspection report are dated 30 May 2023. On 07 January 2024, the landlord filed a claim for rent arrears and compensation for damage to the floor in the hallway and the fence. The landlord states that following the filing of the application the tenancy ended by agreement on 18 January 2024. In addition to the claims in the application, the landlord seeks compensation for damage to walls in the lounge and dining room, missing taps to the kitchen faucet, missing door handles, and damage to the toilet seat. The landlord also claims that the tenant failed to leave the property reasonably clean.

The onus of proving these claims rests with the landlord. The standard required is on the balance of probabilities. The landlord must produce evidence sufficient to establish more likely than not that the tenant has breached the terms of the agreement or provisions of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (The “Act”).

How much is owed for rent?

The landlord is claiming rent arrears to 18 January 2024 of $7,150.00. This is not an amount that the Tribunal can confirm. The tenancy commenced on 11 May 2023. The rent summary produced shows that the tenant has paid $13,300.00 of the rent due of $19,878.57. The Tribunal therefore calculates the rent arrears to be $19,878.57 less $13,300.00 = $6,578.57

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

The property comprises of three bedrooms, lounge/ dining room, kitchen, toilet, bathroom and sleep out. The laundry is in the hallway.

The landlords claims that the tenant failed to leave the property reasonably clean.

At the end of the tenancy the tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) of the Act. Whether a tenant has failed to meet their obligations will involve an objective assessment. It is what the average bystander, in this case the Tribunal considers reasonably clean.

There are limited photographs showing the state of cleanliness at the end of the tenancy. There is insufficient evidence as to the state of cleanliness at the commencement of the tenancy on 11 May 2023. While the pre tenancy checklist assists determining damage, it does not show the state of cleanliness. The Tribunal is unable to make a proper assessment. The claim for cleaning is dismissed.

Is the tenant responsible for any damage?

To succeed with a claim for damage the landlord must prove that damage 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 of the Act.

Fair wear and tear can be described as damage which might reasonably be expected to naturally occur over time, such as the deterioration or gradual wear occurring with everyday use. See Taylor v Webb [1937] 2KB 283 (CA).

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) of the Act.

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) of the Act. 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) of the Act.

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) of the Act.

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.

In dealing with the issue of carelessness the question is whether the tenant was exercising a degree of care and attention that a reasonable and prudent tenant would exercise in the circumstances. The test is objective and not based on the subjective opinion of the tenant or landlord.

In awarding compensation for damage, the Tribunal must also consider 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, the Tribunal must consider the age and condition of the items concerned at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Floor in the hallway

The landlord states that around November 2023 while conducting a property inspection they noted that the floor in the hallway near the bathroom was damaged, that it was “soft and squishy”. The landlord states that the tenant admitted that another occupant had been soaking harakeke in the bath and that there had been a flood. The landlord obtained a quote to repair the damage for $2,169.29, and state that it was repaired shortly after the tenant vacated.

I am not satisfied that the tenant is liable for the damage. The photograph taken on 18 January 2023 and produced with the application shows a section of hallway with a sheet of plywood over the carpet. From the photograph it is not possible to make out the nature of the damage. The quote to repair provided refers to “water damage roofing in bathroom and hallway.” The landlord states that this is an error. During the hearing, the landlord was given an opportunity to produce further evidence including photographs. These photographs show damage to the floor in the bathroom near the shower. It appears that water has been escaping from the shower causing damage to the floor. The nature of the damage suggests that it has occurred over a long period. The landlord accepts this, but still is of the view that the tenant should remain liable for the damage to the floor in the hallway. On the evidence I cannot accept this claim. There is insufficient evidence as to the nature or extent of that damage. I cannot reasonably discount that any issue with the floor in the hallway is connected to the water egress from the shower, as opposed to a one-off flood event. The claim for damage to the hallway floor is dismissed. Fence and gate

The landlord claims that the tenant is liable for damage to a wooden fence and gate. The landlord states that the fence and gate was undamaged at the commencement of the tenancy. The fence and gate face the roadside. The fence has been pushed over from the roadside toward the house, the gate has missing pales. The landlord states that when challenged about the damage the tenant did not offer an explanation. The onus is on the landlord. Based on the photographs of the damage I cannot rule out that the act or omission damaging the fence and gate occurred outside the property and may not have been the fault of the tenant. The claim for damage to the fence is dismissed. Taps to kitchen faucet, door handles, and toilet seat.

The landlord has produced photographs showing that the taps on the kitchen faucet are missing, and that two sets of bedroom door handles are missing. On the evidence I am satisfied that these objects were present and undamaged at the commencement of the tenancy. I am satisfied in this case that the damage is more than fair wear and tear. I award the compensation sought, $126.00 to replace the missing door handles, and $112.00 to replace the faucet. The objects concerned are missing, I make no deductions for betterment. Concerning the toilet seat. The photograph shows that it has a crack and has become detached from the rim of the bowl. Toilet seats in tenanted properties have a lifespan of approximately 5 years. The landlord is unable to tell me how old the seat is. Although there has been damage, I am not satisfied that it is necessarily more than fair wear and tear. Walls

The landlord has produced photographs showing minor damage to walls in the lounge and dining room, consisting of two scuff marks, which were unable to be removed by cleaning, a paint chip, two scrapes, and a small hole. The damage is spread over five walls. I am satisfied that this damage has occurred during the tenancy and that it is more than fair wear and tear. The landlord conducted the repairs themselves and is claiming $750.00 for materials and labour. Based on the evidence I consider compensation of $500.00 to be reasonable. Costs

As the landlord has been substantially successful with their claim I order reimbursement of the filing fee. Name suppression

The landlord seeks name suppression.

Section 95A of the Act provides that on the application of a party that has been wholly or substantially successful in proceedings, the Tribunal must order that the name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that it is in the public interest to publish the names of the parties, or is justified because of the parties’ conduct, or any other circumstances of the case.

The landlord has been substantially successful and is granted name suppression.

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4771677 — net $5,687.01 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 18 January 2024	$6,578.57	Rent arrears to 18 January 2024
Repairs: replace kitchen taps	$112.00	Repairs: replace kitchen taps
Repairs: replace missing door handles	$126.00	Repairs: replace missing door handles
Repairs: to walls in lounge and dining room	$500.00	Repairs: to walls in lounge and dining room
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$5,687.01
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,687.01

Ms [redacted] appeared for the landlord. There was no appearance by the tenant.

How much is owed for rent?

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

The property comprises of three bedrooms, lounge/ dining room, kitchen, toilet, bathroom and sleep out. The laundry is in the hallway.

The landlords claims that the tenant failed to leave the property reasonably clean.

Is the tenant responsible for any damage?

As the landlord has been substantially successful with their claim I order reimbursement of the filing fee. Name suppression

The landlord seeks name suppression.

The landlord has been substantially successful and is granted name suppression.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4771677 — Rent arrears at 7 Enfield Street, Nawton, Hamilton 3200

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4771677 — Rent arrears at 7 Enfield Street, Nawton, Hamilton 3200

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

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 any damage?

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 their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Is the tenant responsible for any damage?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions