What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4798319?

The tribunal order states: Gareth Wadsworth, Holly Bayler-Drake, Alan Matthews, Levi Lutherus, George

How much money was awarded in case 4798319?

Cleaning: $195.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $276.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Carpet: $300.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4798319?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4798319?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10239629-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4798319?

The tribunal order states: Gareth Wadsworth, Holly Bayler-Drake, Alan Matthews, Levi Lutherus, George

How much money was awarded in case 4798319?

Cleaning: $195.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $276.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Carpet: $300.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4798319?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4798319?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10239629-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

9 Gladson Avenue, Sockburn, Christchurch 8042 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4798319 — Cleanliness

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4798319 — net $791.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning	$276.00	Cleaning
Carpet Cleaning	$195.00	Carpet Cleaning
Repairs: Carpet	$300.00	Repairs: Carpet
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$791.44
Bond	$891.44
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$791.44

Gareth Wadsworth, Holly Bayler-Drake, Alan Matthews, Levi Lutherus, George Boyce and Alex Eginton-Abbott to pay Whalan And Partners Limited T/A Bayleys Property Management Canterbury As Agent For Mark And Linda Simmons $791.44 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the balance of the bond of $891.44 (5062130-010) immediately apportioned as follows: Whalan And Partners Limited T/A Bayleys Property Management Canterbury As Agent For Mark And Linda Simmons: $791.44 Gareth Wadsworth, Holly Bayler-Drake, Alan Matthews, Levi Lutherus, George Boyce and Alex Eginton-Abbott: $100.00

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Ms MacGregor and Ms Matthews attended for the landlord and Mr Wadsworth for the tenants.

The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, 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 tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy. The landlord provided photographs from the end of the tenancy and an invoice for the cleaning costs incurred.

At the end of the tenancy the tenants agreed to pay for 6 hours of cleaning. The landlord was invoiced for 8 hours cleaning and initially claimed the full amount from the tenants. The landlord reduced its claim to $276.00 being 6 hours cleaning. The tenants still dispute the cleaning claim. They now allege that the cleaners were not at the premises for 8 hours but could not say how long they were there for. The tenants also say that the premises were cleaner at the end of this tenancy than when they moved in but could not provide any corroborative evidence of that.

The photographs establish that the premises were not reasonably clean. I find that 6 hours is a reasonable time for cleaning based on the photographs provided.

The tenants also dispute the cost of carpet cleaning. However, Ms MacGregor provided a before and after photograph from the carpet cleaner which confirms that the carpets were not reasonably clean at the end of the tenancy.

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.

Carpet to one sleep out was damaged during the tenancy. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant accepted liability for the damage.

However, the landlord did not establish that it is entitled to compensation in the amount claimed ($400). The landlord provided a repair quote of $768.00. The carpet was approximately 3 years old at the start of this tenancy and is now approximately 7 years old. The damaged area has not been repaired. Having regard to the condition of the carpet in the main house, I find it unlikely that the landlord will incur the cost of replacing this section of carpet in the sleepout. I award compensation of $300 for loss of amenity for the carpet damage.

As the landlord was substantially successful, I have also awarded reimbursement of the Tribunal application fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4798319 — net $791.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning	$276.00	Cleaning
Carpet Cleaning	$195.00	Carpet Cleaning
Repairs: Carpet	$300.00	Repairs: Carpet
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$791.44
Bond	$891.44
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$791.44

Order

Gareth Wadsworth, Holly Bayler-Drake, Alan Matthews, Levi Lutherus, George Boyce and Alex Eginton-Abbott to pay Whalan And Partners Limited T/A Bayleys Property Management Canterbury As Agent For Mark And Linda Simmons $791.44 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the balance of the bond of $891.44 (5062130-010) immediately apportioned as follows: Whalan And Partners Limited T/A Bayleys Property Management Canterbury As Agent For Mark And Linda Simmons: $791.44 Gareth Wadsworth, Holly Bayler-Drake, Alan Matthews, Levi Lutherus, George Boyce and Alex Eginton-Abbott: $100.00

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Ms MacGregor and Ms Matthews attended for the landlord and Mr Wadsworth for the tenants.
The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, 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 tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy. The landlord provided photographs from the end of the tenancy and an invoice for the cleaning costs incurred.
At the end of the tenancy the tenants agreed to pay for 6 hours of cleaning. The landlord was invoiced for 8 hours cleaning and initially claimed the full amount from the tenants. The landlord reduced its claim to $276.00 being 6 hours cleaning. The tenants still dispute the cleaning claim. They now allege that the cleaners were not at the premises for 8 hours but could not say how long they were there for. The tenants also say that the premises were cleaner at the end of this tenancy than when they moved in but could not provide any corroborative evidence of that.
The photographs establish that the premises were not reasonably clean. I find that 6 hours is a reasonable time for cleaning based on the photographs provided.
The tenants also dispute the cost of carpet cleaning. However, Ms MacGregor provided a before and after photograph from the carpet cleaner which confirms that the carpets were not reasonably clean at the end of the tenancy.
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.
Carpet to one sleep out was damaged during the tenancy. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant accepted liability for the damage.
However, the landlord did not establish that it is entitled to compensation in the amount claimed ($400). The landlord provided a repair quote of $768.00. The carpet was approximately 3 years old at the start of this tenancy and is now approximately 7 years old. The damaged area has not been repaired. Having regard to the condition of the carpet in the main house, I find it unlikely that the landlord will incur the cost of replacing this section of carpet in the sleepout. I award compensation of $300 for loss of amenity for the carpet damage.
As the landlord was substantially successful, I have also awarded reimbursement of the Tribunal application fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4798319 — Cleanliness at 9 Gladson Avenue, Sockburn, Christchurch 8042

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4798319 — Cleanliness at 9 Gladson Avenue, Sockburn, Christchurch 8042

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