What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4805418 about?

The tribunal order states: Darren Roebuck and Nicola Roebuck must pay [the landlords] $4,626.85

How much money was awarded in case 4805418?

Cleaning: $1,035.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $145.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $138.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,599.61 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $402.75 awarded to landlord; Smoke Alarms: $246.10 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $539.95 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4805418?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness, Property damage, Smoke alarms.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4805418?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10656965-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4805418 about?

The tribunal order states: Darren Roebuck and Nicola Roebuck must pay [the landlords] $4,626.85

How much money was awarded in case 4805418?

Cleaning: $1,035.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $145.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $138.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,599.61 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $402.75 awarded to landlord; Smoke Alarms: $246.10 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $539.95 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4805418?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness, Property damage, Smoke alarms.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4805418?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10656965-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

31 Bahamas Key, Papamoa Beach, Papamoa 3118 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4805418 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

31 Bahamas Key, Papamoa Beach, Papamoa 3118 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4805418 — Rent arrears | TenantCheck

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4805418 — net $4,626.85 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 13/12/23	$1,599.61	Rent arrears to 13/12/23
Water rates	$539.95	Water rates
Carpet Cleaning	$1,035.00	Carpet Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$402.75	Rubbish removal
Lawns and Garden work	$138.00	Lawns and Garden work
Carpet Cleaning	$145.00	Carpet Cleaning
Carpet replacement (contribution	$500.00	Carpet replacement (contribution
Replace light bulbs/smoke alarms	$246.10	Replace light bulbs/smoke alarms
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$4,626.85
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,626.85

Claims and awards for application 4805418 — net $4,626.85 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears to 13/12/23

Amount: $1,599.61
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears to 13/12/23

Water rates

Amount: $539.95
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Water rates

Carpet Cleaning

Amount: $1,035.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Carpet Cleaning

Rubbish removal

Amount: $402.75
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal

Lawns and Garden work

Amount: $138.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lawns and Garden work

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Carpet Cleaning Filing Fee Lawns And Garden Work Property damage Rent arrears Rubbish Removal Replace Smoke Alarms Water Rates

Order

Darren Roebuck and Nicola Roebuck must pay [the landlords] $4,626.85 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing; the tenants did not attend.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

The tenancy ended on 13 December 2023. The landlord has provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amounts owing at the end of the tenancy. The rent figure takes into account the bond refund.

Did the tenants 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 (s 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986). The tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy and replace standard light bulbs.
The tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all their rubbish. The rubbish claim has been recalculated, as the supporting invoice for the rubbish disposal was added twice.
Smoke alarms were missing at the end of the tenancy and numerous light bulbs were missing. In the case of standard light bulbs, I have allowed the full replacement cost. The situation with the more expensive long-life bulbs is not so straightforward, as this type of bulb may have a lifespan much longer than the term of a particular tenancy. Therefore, it is often necessary to consider depreciation. Here, however, as the tenancy lasted for over three years, I have allowed the full replacement cost.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Carpet in two of the downstairs rooms was damaged during the tenancy and had to be replaced.
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 (s 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA).
Where the damage is careless, s 49B RTA applies. Where the damage is covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to the lesser of the insurance excess or four weeks' rent (s 49B(3)(a) RTA).
The claim is for $1,577.20. The insurance excess is $800.00. As it is standard practice for insurance companies to apply an excess for each room damaged, which would be $1,600.00, the landlord has not made an insurance claim.
Betterment and depreciation must be considered. The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached their obligations, and they should not be better or worse off.
The landlord has provided separate invoices for the carpet and for the installation, and has argued that depreciation should be applied to the materials but not the labour.
Depreciation applies to the cost of both materials and labour. The underlying rationale of betterment and depreciation is that the fixtures and fittings in the premises have a finite lifespan and will need to be replaced eventually whether or not damaged by the tenant.
By way of example, if the item in question is at or near the end of its lifespan at the start of the tenancy, and is due for replacement at the end, then the landlord would be responsible for the full replacement cost. If the item due to be replaced was damaged during the tenancy, then, if the tenant became liable for the labour component of replacement, they would be paying for a cost that the landlord would otherwise be responsible for. This would result in an inequitable windfall for the landlord. This principle applies whatever the age of the item damaged.
The carpet in one of the rooms was about 20 years old, and the carpet in the other room was replaced with secondhand carpet before the start of the tenancy. In effect the carpet was near or past its expected lifespan. However, calculating depreciation is not an exact science, as an item that is past its theoretical lifespan may in practice still have several years of life left. It may also be relevant to consider the ‘opportunity cost’ of the enforced premature expenditure.
The replacement carpet ($772.20) was a ‘second’ that was most likely cheaper than equivalent new carpet. Therefore, there is already a degree of discount in this component of the cost. The labour cost to lay the carpet is $805.00. From the photos, it appears the carpet was in reasonable condition at the start of the tenancy. Based on these considerations I have allowed a contribution of $500.00 towards the replacement cost. Filing fee and name suppression.
Because the landlord has largely succeeded with the claim, I have ordered name suppression (which was requested) and reimbursement of the filing fee. J P Smith 24 July 2024

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4805418 — net $4,626.85 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 13/12/23	$1,599.61	Rent arrears to 13/12/23
Water rates	$539.95	Water rates
Carpet Cleaning	$1,035.00	Carpet Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$402.75	Rubbish removal
Lawns and Garden work	$138.00	Lawns and Garden work
Carpet Cleaning	$145.00	Carpet Cleaning
Carpet replacement (contribution	$500.00	Carpet replacement (contribution
Replace light bulbs/smoke alarms	$246.10	Replace light bulbs/smoke alarms
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$4,626.85
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,626.85

Claims and awards for application 4805418 — net $4,626.85 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears to 13/12/23

Amount: $1,599.61
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears to 13/12/23

Water rates

Amount: $539.95
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Water rates

Carpet Cleaning

Amount: $1,035.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Carpet Cleaning

Rubbish removal

Amount: $402.75
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal

Lawns and Garden work

Amount: $138.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lawns and Garden work

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Carpet Cleaning Filing Fee Lawns And Garden Work Property damage Rent arrears Rubbish Removal Replace Smoke Alarms Water Rates

Order

Darren Roebuck and Nicola Roebuck must pay [the landlords] $4,626.85 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing; the tenants did not attend.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

The tenancy ended on 13 December 2023. The landlord has provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amounts owing at the end of the tenancy. The rent figure takes into account the bond refund.

Did the tenants 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 (s 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986). The tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy and replace standard light bulbs.
The tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all their rubbish. The rubbish claim has been recalculated, as the supporting invoice for the rubbish disposal was added twice.
Smoke alarms were missing at the end of the tenancy and numerous light bulbs were missing. In the case of standard light bulbs, I have allowed the full replacement cost. The situation with the more expensive long-life bulbs is not so straightforward, as this type of bulb may have a lifespan much longer than the term of a particular tenancy. Therefore, it is often necessary to consider depreciation. Here, however, as the tenancy lasted for over three years, I have allowed the full replacement cost.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Carpet in two of the downstairs rooms was damaged during the tenancy and had to be replaced.
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 (s 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA).
Where the damage is careless, s 49B RTA applies. Where the damage is covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to the lesser of the insurance excess or four weeks' rent (s 49B(3)(a) RTA).
The claim is for $1,577.20. The insurance excess is $800.00. As it is standard practice for insurance companies to apply an excess for each room damaged, which would be $1,600.00, the landlord has not made an insurance claim.
Betterment and depreciation must be considered. The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached their obligations, and they should not be better or worse off.
The landlord has provided separate invoices for the carpet and for the installation, and has argued that depreciation should be applied to the materials but not the labour.
Depreciation applies to the cost of both materials and labour. The underlying rationale of betterment and depreciation is that the fixtures and fittings in the premises have a finite lifespan and will need to be replaced eventually whether or not damaged by the tenant.
By way of example, if the item in question is at or near the end of its lifespan at the start of the tenancy, and is due for replacement at the end, then the landlord would be responsible for the full replacement cost. If the item due to be replaced was damaged during the tenancy, then, if the tenant became liable for the labour component of replacement, they would be paying for a cost that the landlord would otherwise be responsible for. This would result in an inequitable windfall for the landlord. This principle applies whatever the age of the item damaged.
The carpet in one of the rooms was about 20 years old, and the carpet in the other room was replaced with secondhand carpet before the start of the tenancy. In effect the carpet was near or past its expected lifespan. However, calculating depreciation is not an exact science, as an item that is past its theoretical lifespan may in practice still have several years of life left. It may also be relevant to consider the ‘opportunity cost’ of the enforced premature expenditure.
The replacement carpet ($772.20) was a ‘second’ that was most likely cheaper than equivalent new carpet. Therefore, there is already a degree of discount in this component of the cost. The labour cost to lay the carpet is $805.00. From the photos, it appears the carpet was in reasonable condition at the start of the tenancy. Based on these considerations I have allowed a contribution of $500.00 towards the replacement cost. Filing fee and name suppression.
Because the landlord has largely succeeded with the claim, I have ordered name suppression (which was requested) and reimbursement of the filing fee. J P Smith 24 July 2024

Tenancy Tribunal case 4805418 — Rent arrears at 31 Bahamas Key, Papamoa Beach, Papamoa 3118

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4805418 — Rent arrears at 31 Bahamas Key, Papamoa Beach, Papamoa 3118

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

Did the tenants 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

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

Did the tenants 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