What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4773623?

The tribunal order states: Mano Teriaki must pay Michelle Anne Lisignoli $1,331.47 immediately, calculated

How much money was awarded in case 4773623?

Cleaning: $600.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $370.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $170.00 awarded to landlord; Wall Behind Door In Lounge: $50.13 awarded to landlord; Replace Heat Pump Remote: $37.89 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $83.01 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4773623?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4773623?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10200699-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4773623?

The tribunal order states: Mano Teriaki must pay Michelle Anne Lisignoli $1,331.47 immediately, calculated

How much money was awarded in case 4773623?

Cleaning: $600.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $370.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $170.00 awarded to landlord; Wall Behind Door In Lounge: $50.13 awarded to landlord; Replace Heat Pump Remote: $37.89 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $83.01 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4773623?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4773623?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10200699-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

37 Corrin Street, Melville, Hamilton 3206 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4773623 — Cleanliness

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4773623 — net $1,331.47 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Repairs: wall behind door in lounge	$50.13	Repairs: wall behind door in lounge
Replace heat pump remote	$37.89	Replace heat pump remote
Lawns and Garden work	$370.00	Lawns and Garden work
Rubbish removal	$83.01	Rubbish removal
Lock/key replacement	$170.00	Lock/key replacement
Cleaning	$600.00	Cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,331.47
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,331.47

The landlord appeared. There was no appearance by the tenant.

The tenancy commenced on 15 April 2023 and ended on 31 October 2023. On 21 November 2023, the Tribunal awarded the landlord rent arrears and released the bond. The landlord advises that the balance owing is presently being enforced. On 21 December 2023, the landlord filed a further claim that the tenant was responsible for damage to wall and heat pump remote, had failed to leave the property, including the lawns reasonably tidy, had failed to remove all rubbish, and had failed to return the keys.

The landlord is claiming $50.13 to repair damage to the wall, $37.89 to replace a damaged heat pump remote, $1,081.00 for cleaning, $370.00 for lawn maintenance, $83.01 for rubbish removal, and $170.00 to re barrel the locks.

The onus of proving a claim will rest with the landlord The standard required is on the balance of probabilities. The landlord must 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”).

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) of the Act.

The landlord has produced photographs showing the inside of the property and the grounds at the end of the tenancy. After considering the evidence, I am satisfied that the tenant has failed to leave the grounds in a reasonable condition. The lawns are knee deep in places and required mowing more than once to return them to the state they were in at the commencement. Regarding rubbish removal, I am satisfied that the tenant has failed to remove all rubbish. The amount claimed for lawn mowing, which includes disposal fees, and rubbish removal is awarded in full.

The property has three bedrooms, kitchen / dining room, lounge, bathroom, toilet, laundry, and garage. The landlord has produced photographs showing the bathroom, kitchen, and one of the bedrooms at the end of the tenancy. I am satisfied that these areas have not been left in a reasonably clean condition. The cleaning invoice refers to an attempt by the cleaner to remove marks from walls throughout the property. There is evidence of marks on two walls, and what appear to be blood splatters on another. Any compensation awarded must be based on the evidence and be reasonable. Based on the evidence, I am not satisfied that the full amount claimed is justified. I award the landlord cleaning costs of $600.00.

The pre tenancy checklist produced shows that the tenant was provided with keys. These were not returned at the end of the tenancy. To secure the property for the incoming tenant, the landlord had the locks re barrelled and new keys cut at a cost of $170.00.

There is a heat pump at the property installed around February 2023. The heat pump and the remote unit was in good condition at the commencement of the tenancy. The landlord has produced a photograph of the remote taken at the end of the tenancy. The remote appears to have been chewed, it has tooth marks on it, and the display screen is broken. The tenant had permission to have a dog. I am satisfied that the tenant is liable for this damage. The amount claimed is awarded.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

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.

The damage claimed is to a wall behind a door into the lounge. The landlord has produced a photograph of the damage which is adjacent to the door handle. The landlord states there is a door stop to avoid this type of damage, which they state likely occurred because the door was slammed against the wall with force. There is no damage to the wall shown in the pre tenancy checklist. I am satisfied that the damage to the wall has occurred during the tenancy and that it is more than fair wear and tear. In my view, it was likely the result of carelessness. The amount claimed, and awarded, is less than the landlord’s insurance excess. Costs

As the landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim, I have reimbursed the filing fee. Name suppression

Although the landlord has been substantially successful, and entitled to do so, they do not seek name suppression.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4773623 — net $1,331.47 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Repairs: wall behind door in lounge	$50.13	Repairs: wall behind door in lounge
Replace heat pump remote	$37.89	Replace heat pump remote
Lawns and Garden work	$370.00	Lawns and Garden work
Rubbish removal	$83.01	Rubbish removal
Lock/key replacement	$170.00	Lock/key replacement
Cleaning	$600.00	Cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,331.47
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,331.47

Order

Mano Teriaki must pay Michelle Anne Lisignoli $1,331.47 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord appeared. There was no appearance by the tenant.
The tenancy commenced on 15 April 2023 and ended on 31 October 2023. On 21 November 2023, the Tribunal awarded the landlord rent arrears and released the bond. The landlord advises that the balance owing is presently being enforced. On 21 December 2023, the landlord filed a further claim that the tenant was responsible for damage to wall and heat pump remote, had failed to leave the property, including the lawns reasonably tidy, had failed to remove all rubbish, and had failed to return the keys.
The landlord is claiming $50.13 to repair damage to the wall, $37.89 to replace a damaged heat pump remote, $1,081.00 for cleaning, $370.00 for lawn maintenance, $83.01 for rubbish removal, and $170.00 to re barrel the locks.
The onus of proving a claim will rest with the landlord The standard required is on the balance of probabilities. The landlord must 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”).

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) of the Act.
The landlord has produced photographs showing the inside of the property and the grounds at the end of the tenancy. After considering the evidence, I am satisfied that the tenant has failed to leave the grounds in a reasonable condition. The lawns are knee deep in places and required mowing more than once to return them to the state they were in at the commencement. Regarding rubbish removal, I am satisfied that the tenant has failed to remove all rubbish. The amount claimed for lawn mowing, which includes disposal fees, and rubbish removal is awarded in full.
The property has three bedrooms, kitchen / dining room, lounge, bathroom, toilet, laundry, and garage. The landlord has produced photographs showing the bathroom, kitchen, and one of the bedrooms at the end of the tenancy. I am satisfied that these areas have not been left in a reasonably clean condition. The cleaning invoice refers to an attempt by the cleaner to remove marks from walls throughout the property. There is evidence of marks on two walls, and what appear to be blood splatters on another. Any compensation awarded must be based on the evidence and be reasonable. Based on the evidence, I am not satisfied that the full amount claimed is justified. I award the landlord cleaning costs of $600.00.
The pre tenancy checklist produced shows that the tenant was provided with keys. These were not returned at the end of the tenancy. To secure the property for the incoming tenant, the landlord had the locks re barrelled and new keys cut at a cost of $170.00.
There is a heat pump at the property installed around February 2023. The heat pump and the remote unit was in good condition at the commencement of the tenancy. The landlord has produced a photograph of the remote taken at the end of the tenancy. The remote appears to have been chewed, it has tooth marks on it, and the display screen is broken. The tenant had permission to have a dog. I am satisfied that the tenant is liable for this damage. The amount claimed is awarded.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

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.
The damage claimed is to a wall behind a door into the lounge. The landlord has produced a photograph of the damage which is adjacent to the door handle. The landlord states there is a door stop to avoid this type of damage, which they state likely occurred because the door was slammed against the wall with force. There is no damage to the wall shown in the pre tenancy checklist. I am satisfied that the damage to the wall has occurred during the tenancy and that it is more than fair wear and tear. In my view, it was likely the result of carelessness. The amount claimed, and awarded, is less than the landlord’s insurance excess. Costs
As the landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim, I have reimbursed the filing fee. Name suppression
Although the landlord has been substantially successful, and entitled to do so, they do not seek name suppression.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4773623 — Cleanliness at 37 Corrin Street, Melville, Hamilton 3206

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4773623 — Cleanliness at 37 Corrin Street, Melville, Hamilton 3206

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Frequently asked questions