What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4804361 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] to pay [The landlord/s] $1,285.71 from the bond, calculated as

How much money was awarded in case 4804361?

Property Damage: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $285.71 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4804361?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4804361?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10574812-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4804361 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] to pay [The landlord/s] $1,285.71 from the bond, calculated as

How much money was awarded in case 4804361?

Property Damage: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $285.71 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4804361?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4804361?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10574812-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4804361 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4804361 — net $1,285.71 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$285.71	Rent arrears
insurance excess	$1,000.00	insurance excess
Net award	$1,285.71
Bond	$1,600.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,285.71

Both parties attended the hearing.

[The tenant/s] initially applied for his bond to be refunded after his tenancy ended in December 2023.

The landlord subsequently cross applied for rent arrears, compensation, and refund of the bond. Three claims for compensation were withdrawn prior to the hearing, the only remaining being for rent arrears and reimbursement of the insurance excess.

[The tenant/s] agrees with the rent arrears, accordingly that order is made by consent.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

[The landlord/s] for the landlord claims $1,000 being the insurance excess for replacement of the benchtop. He provided photos that show numerous cut marks, many of which were in the same area. He submits that [The tenant/s] intentionally damaged the benchtop by cutting into it and the level of damage is such that it now needs to be replaced. They say he intentionally hid the marks at inspections and did not advise his property manager of them. They have provided evidence that the insurance company has accepted the claim and the replacement process is underway.

[The tenant/s] says that there were some marks present at the commencement of the tenancy and considers the additional marks that occurred during the tenancy amount to fair wear and tear. He says he did not intentionally hide the marks at inspections and was careful to use a cutting board. He is concerned the landlord is using him to upgrade their apartment.

The Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) is the applicable law and details that a landlord, in order to be successful in a claim for damages, must prove that the 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 RTA.

The standard of proof is the civil standard of the balance of probabilities, or put another way, what is more likely than not.

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.

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.

Having assessed the evidence, I am satisfied that the damage was more likely than not caused by careless use. The main reason for this finding is the extent of damage that was caused over a short tenancy, being seven months. There are a number of scratches, many going in different directions. There were certainly a few scratches at the commencement of the tenancy, however there were a significant number at the end. The scratches that had occurred in the bench’s life span prior to this tenancy (5.5 years) were minimal compared to the number that occurred during this seven-month tenure.

I accept [The tenant/s] evidence that he did not intentionally cause these marks. The evidence does not substantiate any allegation that he attempted to hide them from his property manager during inspections.

Accordingly, [The tenant/s]is liable for the damage.

In determining the compensation payable, depreciation must be taken into account. Depreciation is linked to the concept of betterment. Everything is subject to wear and tear and will need to be replaced in time. Where an item has to be replaced as a result of tenant damage, this hastens the process. If the damaged item is replaced with a ‘better’ item, compensation is adjusted to reflect that.

The landlord’s evidence is that the cost of replacement will be between $3,000 and $4,500. The cost of the replacement of the bench top alone is $2,346 and that does not account for the plumber and electrician who will be required to remove and then replace the cook top and sink.

Bench tops of this nature have an expected lifespan of between 20 and 40 years. Reducing the total cost to account for depreciation would still give a figure higher than the insurance excess. I therefore consider it just that [The tenant/s] liability be capped at the insurance excess.

I do not award reimbursement of the filing fee to either party as they both incurred the cost in bringing their claims to the Tribunal.

I approve suppression orders as both parties were successful to an extent in their claims.

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4804361 — net $1,285.71 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$285.71	Rent arrears
insurance excess	$1,000.00	insurance excess
Net award	$1,285.71
Bond	$1,600.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,285.71

Both parties attended the hearing.

[The tenant/s] initially applied for his bond to be refunded after his tenancy ended in December 2023.

[The tenant/s] agrees with the rent arrears, accordingly that order is made by consent.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The standard of proof is the civil standard of the balance of probabilities, or put another way, what is more likely than not.

Accordingly, [The tenant/s]is liable for the damage.

I do not award reimbursement of the filing fee to either party as they both incurred the cost in bringing their claims to the Tribunal.

I approve suppression orders as both parties were successful to an extent in their claims.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4804361 — Property damage

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4804361 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions