What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4774760?

The tribunal order states: Jadene Merehana and Jamaine Hohaia to pay Malaika And Associates Limited

How much money was awarded in case 4774760?

Cleaning: $150.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Painting: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $460.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $482.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $60.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $75.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4774760?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4774760?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10262303-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4774760?

The tribunal order states: Jadene Merehana and Jamaine Hohaia to pay Malaika And Associates Limited

How much money was awarded in case 4774760?

Cleaning: $150.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Painting: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $460.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $482.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $60.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $75.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4774760?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4774760?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10262303-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

41A Goodwood Drive, Goodwood Heights, Auckland 2105 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4774760 — Property damage

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4774760 — net $1,347.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Carpet Cleaning	$150.00	Carpet Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$75.00	Rubbish removal
Carpet replacement	$460.00	Carpet replacement
Painting	$100.00	Painting
Stove top replacement	$482.00	Stove top replacement
Curtains replacement	$60.00	Curtains replacement
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,347.44
Bond	$1,800.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,347.44

Order

Jadene Merehana and Jamaine Hohaia to pay Malaika And Associates Limited as Agent for Saif & Sail Al-Malaika $1,347.44 from the bond, calculated as shown in the table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,800.00 (6193797-001) immediately apportioned as follows: Malaika And Associates Limited as Agent for Saif & Sail Al-Malaika: $1,347.44 Jadene Merehana and Jamaine Hohaia: $452.56

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 23 April 2024.
The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The tenancy started on 14 August 2019 and ended on 19 October 2023. The tenants said they had lived there for a longer period, about 7 years.

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. The tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The landlord claimed $300.00 for cleaning and $150.00 for carpet cleaning. It was difficult to see where cleaning was required from the landlord’s photographs. The photographs do show staining to carpets. I award the carpet cleaning costs but make no award for general cleaning. The property looks to have been left reasonably clean and tidy.
There was some rubbish left behind at the end of the tenancy. This included items underneath the house. The tenants said one of the photographs showed a wooden gate. This had blown over and was being stored there. The landlord acknowledged this but said other rubbish items were shown in the pictures. The tenants accepted that a rusted metal frame had been left behind.
The landlord claimed $250.00 for rubbish removal. It is unclear how much, if any, of the items under the house belonged to the tenants. I award $75.00 for removal of the metal frame.
The landlord had to replace an LED light and claimed $51.75 plus labour charges. After discussion, both parties agreed that replacing the light required some technical skill, beyond unscrewing the light and replacing it with another. Therefore, the cost replacing the light falls on the landlord as a maintenance obligation.
The landlord claimed $1,125.00 for 2.5 weeks loss of rent due to the condition the property was left in. The landlord said they had a new tenant ready to move in straight away, but this had to be pushed back. The landlord was given an opportunity after the hearing to establish that new tenants were ready to move in.
The emails provided show that a prospective tenant applied for a tenancy of the property on 20 October 2023. The application form was included but is unreadable. It is possible the new tenant was available to move in immediately, but no tenancy agreement to that effect had been signed prior to the tenants leaving. In the emails, a tenancy agreement was provided for signature on 7 November 2023 and the start date for the next tenancy was agreed as 16 November 2023.
I consider that, after a long tenancy, the landlord could have expected some wear and tear and the need for maintenance or renovation before new tenants could move in. All the issues with the property were capable of remedy within a short period. There does not seem to have been a contract for the next tenant to move in immediately after the tenants vacated. I decline to award loss of rent.

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.
Where the damage is careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August 2019, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.
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 4 weeks' rent. I understood that there was no house insurance for carelessly caused damage.
Where the damage is careless and is not covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to 4 weeks' rent. The weekly rent was $450.00.
The landlord claimed $920.00 for replacement carpet in a bedroom. The landlord said the carpet was stained. After cleaning, staining and mould was found underneath. The tenants noted that they have 2 children and they tried to keep the carpet in good condition by hiring a rug doctor.
The landlord’s photographs do show staining to the bedroom carpet after cleaning. I accept that the carpet needed replacing and that some award of compensation is appropriate. The carpets however were at least 4 years old (7 years old on the tenants’ evidence). I award $460.00 for carpet replacement after making allowance for depreciation.
The landlord claimed $500.00 for painting and mould removal. There was damage to the bathroom ceiling and mould at the end of the tenancy. There was also an area of damage to the corner of a wall in one of the photographs, showing a multitude of chip marks below waist height. The tenants said they told the landlord the extractor fan was not working property and he advised them to wipe down the walls every day. The landlord accepted that the tenants told him they did not think the fan was working very well, and says he told the tenants to clean the mould regularly at inspections.
I find that the tenants are not liable for the mould removal and painting costs in the bathroom. They raised concerns about the extractor fan, but this does not seem to have been checked. The tenants said they were wiping the bathroom all the time and bought a dehumidifier to help. The mould may have been caused by dampness due to insufficient ventilation, contributed to by an inadequate or malfunctioning fan.
I award $100.00 for the damage visible to a wall, as mentioned above. This appears to be careless damage that occurred over time, possibly from moving furniture.
The stove top was damaged during the tenancy. The tenants admitted that they unintentionally dropped a pan onto the cooktop, smashing the surface. I find that this damage was caused carelessly. I award the cost of a replacement cooktop ($298.00) and the labour cost of installing it ($184.00) a total award of $482.00.
The landlord claimed $90.00 for 3 replacement linen curtains and $471.50 for replacement blinds. The landlord’s photographs show mouldy linen curtains. The tenants said the property had lots of condensation and they had to wipe the windows every morning. The landlord said that the tenants of other units in the building periodically wash the curtains to keep them clean. I consider it would have been reasonable for the tenants to wash the linen curtains every 4-6 months to prevent them becoming too mouldy. The invoice provided was for 2 sets of linen curtains not 3. I award the cost of 2 replacement linen curtains together with the labour cost of installation (a total award of $160.00).
The landlord’s photographs do not show extensive mould or damage to the blinds. I decline to award compensation. Filing fee
The landlord’s application has been partly successful. I award the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4774760 — net $1,347.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Carpet Cleaning	$150.00	Carpet Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$75.00	Rubbish removal
Carpet replacement	$460.00	Carpet replacement
Painting	$100.00	Painting
Stove top replacement	$482.00	Stove top replacement
Curtains replacement	$60.00	Curtains replacement
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,347.44
Bond	$1,800.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,347.44

Order

Jadene Merehana and Jamaine Hohaia to pay Malaika And Associates Limited as Agent for Saif & Sail Al-Malaika $1,347.44 from the bond, calculated as shown in the table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,800.00 (6193797-001) immediately apportioned as follows: Malaika And Associates Limited as Agent for Saif & Sail Al-Malaika: $1,347.44 Jadene Merehana and Jamaine Hohaia: $452.56

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 23 April 2024.
The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The tenancy started on 14 August 2019 and ended on 19 October 2023. The tenants said they had lived there for a longer period, about 7 years.

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. The tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The landlord claimed $300.00 for cleaning and $150.00 for carpet cleaning. It was difficult to see where cleaning was required from the landlord’s photographs. The photographs do show staining to carpets. I award the carpet cleaning costs but make no award for general cleaning. The property looks to have been left reasonably clean and tidy.
There was some rubbish left behind at the end of the tenancy. This included items underneath the house. The tenants said one of the photographs showed a wooden gate. This had blown over and was being stored there. The landlord acknowledged this but said other rubbish items were shown in the pictures. The tenants accepted that a rusted metal frame had been left behind.
The landlord claimed $250.00 for rubbish removal. It is unclear how much, if any, of the items under the house belonged to the tenants. I award $75.00 for removal of the metal frame.
The landlord had to replace an LED light and claimed $51.75 plus labour charges. After discussion, both parties agreed that replacing the light required some technical skill, beyond unscrewing the light and replacing it with another. Therefore, the cost replacing the light falls on the landlord as a maintenance obligation.
The landlord claimed $1,125.00 for 2.5 weeks loss of rent due to the condition the property was left in. The landlord said they had a new tenant ready to move in straight away, but this had to be pushed back. The landlord was given an opportunity after the hearing to establish that new tenants were ready to move in.
The emails provided show that a prospective tenant applied for a tenancy of the property on 20 October 2023. The application form was included but is unreadable. It is possible the new tenant was available to move in immediately, but no tenancy agreement to that effect had been signed prior to the tenants leaving. In the emails, a tenancy agreement was provided for signature on 7 November 2023 and the start date for the next tenancy was agreed as 16 November 2023.
I consider that, after a long tenancy, the landlord could have expected some wear and tear and the need for maintenance or renovation before new tenants could move in. All the issues with the property were capable of remedy within a short period. There does not seem to have been a contract for the next tenant to move in immediately after the tenants vacated. I decline to award loss of rent.

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.
Where the damage is careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August 2019, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.
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 4 weeks' rent. I understood that there was no house insurance for carelessly caused damage.
Where the damage is careless and is not covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to 4 weeks' rent. The weekly rent was $450.00.
The landlord claimed $920.00 for replacement carpet in a bedroom. The landlord said the carpet was stained. After cleaning, staining and mould was found underneath. The tenants noted that they have 2 children and they tried to keep the carpet in good condition by hiring a rug doctor.
The landlord’s photographs do show staining to the bedroom carpet after cleaning. I accept that the carpet needed replacing and that some award of compensation is appropriate. The carpets however were at least 4 years old (7 years old on the tenants’ evidence). I award $460.00 for carpet replacement after making allowance for depreciation.
The landlord claimed $500.00 for painting and mould removal. There was damage to the bathroom ceiling and mould at the end of the tenancy. There was also an area of damage to the corner of a wall in one of the photographs, showing a multitude of chip marks below waist height. The tenants said they told the landlord the extractor fan was not working property and he advised them to wipe down the walls every day. The landlord accepted that the tenants told him they did not think the fan was working very well, and says he told the tenants to clean the mould regularly at inspections.
I find that the tenants are not liable for the mould removal and painting costs in the bathroom. They raised concerns about the extractor fan, but this does not seem to have been checked. The tenants said they were wiping the bathroom all the time and bought a dehumidifier to help. The mould may have been caused by dampness due to insufficient ventilation, contributed to by an inadequate or malfunctioning fan.
I award $100.00 for the damage visible to a wall, as mentioned above. This appears to be careless damage that occurred over time, possibly from moving furniture.
The stove top was damaged during the tenancy. The tenants admitted that they unintentionally dropped a pan onto the cooktop, smashing the surface. I find that this damage was caused carelessly. I award the cost of a replacement cooktop ($298.00) and the labour cost of installing it ($184.00) a total award of $482.00.
The landlord claimed $90.00 for 3 replacement linen curtains and $471.50 for replacement blinds. The landlord’s photographs show mouldy linen curtains. The tenants said the property had lots of condensation and they had to wipe the windows every morning. The landlord said that the tenants of other units in the building periodically wash the curtains to keep them clean. I consider it would have been reasonable for the tenants to wash the linen curtains every 4-6 months to prevent them becoming too mouldy. The invoice provided was for 2 sets of linen curtains not 3. I award the cost of 2 replacement linen curtains together with the labour cost of installation (a total award of $160.00).
The landlord’s photographs do not show extensive mould or damage to the blinds. I decline to award compensation. Filing fee
The landlord’s application has been partly successful. I award the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4774760 — Property damage at 41A Goodwood Drive, Goodwood Heights, Auckland 2105

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4774760 — Property damage at 41A Goodwood Drive, Goodwood Heights, Auckland 2105

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

Property management

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions