What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4777999 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] to pay Barfoot & Thompson Property Limited $541.81 from the

How much money was awarded in case 4777999?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Melamine Strip In Pantry: $264.50 awarded to landlord; Replace chattels: Pot, oven tray, 2…: $256.87 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4777999?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4777999?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10314478-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4777999 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] to pay Barfoot & Thompson Property Limited $541.81 from the

How much money was awarded in case 4777999?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Melamine Strip In Pantry: $264.50 awarded to landlord; Replace chattels: Pot, oven tray, 2…: $256.87 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4777999?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4777999?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10314478-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

41 Grange Road, Otumoetai, Tauranga 3110 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4777999 — Property damage

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4777999 — net $541.81 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Replace chattels: Pot, oven tray, 2 spoons, 3 tea- spoons, 6 desert forks	$256.87	Replace chattels: Pot, oven tray, 2 spoons, 3 tea- spoons, 6 desert forks
Repairs: Melamine strip in pantry	$264.50	Repairs: Melamine strip in pantry
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$541.81
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$541.81

Both parties attended the hearing.

The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

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) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.

The following chattels were missing at the end of the tenancy: pot, 2 spoons, 3 teaspoons, and 6 desert forks.

The oven tray was beyond cleaning and had to be replaced.

The amounts ordered are proved.

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.

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) RTA.

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) RTA. 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) RTA.

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) 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 following damage was caused during the tenancy: melamine strip in kitchen pantry. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The amount ordered is proved.

The landlord was unable to provide sufficient evidence that a television and side lamp were damaged during this tenancy. It is likely that both items would be fully depreciated in any event given that the television was at least 6 years old and the lamp at least 4 years old.

As Barfoot & Thompson Property Limited has substantially succeeded with the claim, the tenant must reimburse the filing fee.

The tenant sought name suppression.

Section 95A of the RTA provides that the Tribunal must order suppression if the party applying for it has been wholly or substantially successful in the proceedings.

The Tribunal may also, on the application of any party to proceedings or on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that all or part of the evidence given or the name or any identifying particulars of any witness or party not be published (section 95A(4) RTA)

Taking into consideration the parties’ interest, alongside that of the public interest, on balance I find that in the particular circumstances of this case, the tenant considerations outweigh other considerations. The application for name suppression is granted.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4777999 — net $541.81 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Replace chattels: Pot, oven tray, 2 spoons, 3 tea- spoons, 6 desert forks	$256.87	Replace chattels: Pot, oven tray, 2 spoons, 3 tea- spoons, 6 desert forks
Repairs: Melamine strip in pantry	$264.50	Repairs: Melamine strip in pantry
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$541.81
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$541.81

Order

[The tenant/s] to pay Barfoot & Thompson Property Limited $541.81 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,400.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as shown in table below.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

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) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The following chattels were missing at the end of the tenancy: pot, 2 spoons, 3 teaspoons, and 6 desert forks.
The oven tray was beyond cleaning and had to be replaced.
The amounts ordered are proved.

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.
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) RTA.
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) RTA. 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) RTA.
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) 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 following damage was caused during the tenancy: melamine strip in kitchen pantry. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amount ordered is proved.
The landlord was unable to provide sufficient evidence that a television and side lamp were damaged during this tenancy. It is likely that both items would be fully depreciated in any event given that the television was at least 6 years old and the lamp at least 4 years old.
As Barfoot & Thompson Property Limited has substantially succeeded with the claim, the tenant must reimburse the filing fee.
The tenant sought name suppression.
Section 95A of the RTA provides that the Tribunal must order suppression if the party applying for it has been wholly or substantially successful in the proceedings.
The Tribunal may also, on the application of any party to proceedings or on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that all or part of the evidence given or the name or any identifying particulars of any witness or party not be published (section 95A(4) RTA)
Taking into consideration the parties’ interest, alongside that of the public interest, on balance I find that in the particular circumstances of this case, the tenant considerations outweigh other considerations. The application for name suppression is granted.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4777999 — Property damage at 41 Grange Road, Otumoetai, Tauranga 3110

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4777999 — Property damage at 41 Grange Road, Otumoetai, Tauranga 3110

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