How much money was awarded in case 4805762?

Cleaning: $532.80 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $5,445.18 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $57.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $700.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $5,000.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $57.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4805762?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4805762?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10532513-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 4805762?

Cleaning: $532.80 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $5,445.18 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $57.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $700.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $5,000.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $57.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4805762?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4805762?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10532513-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat Flat 4, 7 Cecil Place, Waltham, Christchurch 8023 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4805762 — Cleanliness

Q: What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4805762?

The tribunal order states: Harriet Kaitlyn Poole must pay Otautahi Community Housing Trust $11,633.42

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4805762 — net $11,633.42 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning, including oven	$532.80	Cleaning, including oven
Lock/key replacement	$57.50	Lock/key replacement
Meth testing/Cleaning	$5,445.18	Meth testing/Cleaning
Carpet replacement	$700.00	Carpet replacement
Repair walls and ceiling	$5,000.00	Repair walls and ceiling
Repair door	$57.50	Repair door
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$11,633.42
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$11,633.42

Harriet Kaitlyn Poole must pay Otautahi Community Housing Trust $11,633.42 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $180.00 (3448637-003) to Otautahi Community Housing Trust immediately. DescriptionLandlord Cleaning, including oven$532.80 Lock/key replacement$57.50 Meth testing/Cleaning$5,445.18 Carpet replacement$700.00 Repair walls and ceiling$5,000.00 Repair door$57.50 Filing fee reimbursement$20.44 Total award$11,813.42 Bond$180.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$11,633.42

Reasons

Mr Waters, Ms Newton and Mr Trusttum attended the hearing for the landlord. The tenant did not attend.

The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy on 12 December 2023.

Did the tenant comply with her obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Ms Poole did not leave the premises reasonably clean and did not return all keys as required by section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act).

The amounts ordered are proved.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

To be successful in a claim for damage to the premises, a landlord must prove that 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, or others at the premises with their permission, did not carelessly or intentionally cause or permit the damage: sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B of the Act.

The landlord claims the cost to remediate the following: •Damage to walls and ceilings in all rooms •Damage to the front door •Damage caused by methamphetamine contamination.

The walls and ceilings were damaged by holes, large dents, and drawings/paintings. The tenant had attempted to complete some repairs, but the repairs were not done to a workmanlike standard. The damage to the door was a strip removed from the door edge.

I am satisfied that the damage to the walls, ceilings, and front door occurred during the tenancy, the damage is beyond fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for it.

I am also satisfied that the methamphetamine contamination occurred during the tenancy. The premises were tested for methamphetamine on 20 November 2023. The Detailed Assessment Report completed by Meth Test Canterbury Ltd records levels of methamphetamine contamination in all rooms but only the bedroom had a level exceeding the recommended ‘safe’ level of 15 μg/100cm² (the levels from the two samples taken from the bedroom were 8.8 μg/100cm² and 36 μg/100cm²). The premises were last tested for methamphetamine on 10 March 2022 (during the period of the tenancy). The report records that the two samples taken from the bedroom were in the same areas as those taken in November 2023 and the levels detected at that time were below 15 μg/100cm² (7.2 μg/100cm and 4.8 μg/100cm² ).

I therefore find the tenant liable for the cost to remediate the damage caused by the methamphetamine contamination in the bedroom and for cost incurred to test the premises in November 2023. Removal of the methamphetamine contamination in the bedroom required a ‘triple’ clean of that room and complete repainting of walls and ceilings (the cleaning work had damaged the paintwork). It also required the carpet to be replaced (other soft furnishings such as curtains also required replacement, but the landlord did not claim this cost from the tenant).

The amounts ordered have been established by the production of invoices. The amount claimed for painting of all rooms has been reduced because it is unclear whether the cost claimed for the pigment sealer (used to seal any methamphetamine residue) was for just bedroom or for the entire premises. The claim to replace the carpet has been reduced to account for betterment or depreciation. Ms Newton thought that the carpets were approximately five years old and carpets are expected to last approximately 12 to 15 years before requiring replacement.

The landlord also claimed the cost to test for methamphetamine in March 2022. Mr Waters said that this was done to obtain a baseline test (it appears no test was done before the tenancy commenced on 24 January 2020). However, as mentioned the results returned levels below 15 μg/100cm². There is therefore no ‘damage’ to the premises at that point for which the tenant could be liable. I therefore do not consider it appropriate that the tenant be liable for the cost of this testing and that claim is dismissed.

The landlord has been mostly successful I its claim and I consider this an appropriate case to award payment of the Tribunal application fee.

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4805762 — net $11,633.42 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning, including oven	$532.80	Cleaning, including oven
Lock/key replacement	$57.50	Lock/key replacement
Meth testing/Cleaning	$5,445.18	Meth testing/Cleaning
Carpet replacement	$700.00	Carpet replacement
Repair walls and ceiling	$5,000.00	Repair walls and ceiling
Repair door	$57.50	Repair door
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$11,633.42
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$11,633.42

Harriet Kaitlyn Poole must pay Otautahi Community Housing Trust $11,633.42 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

Mr Waters, Ms Newton and Mr Trusttum attended the hearing for the landlord. The tenant did not attend.

The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy on 12 December 2023.

Did the tenant comply with her obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Ms Poole did not leave the premises reasonably clean and did not return all keys as required by section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act).

The amounts ordered are proved.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The landlord claims the cost to remediate the following: •Damage to walls and ceilings in all rooms •Damage to the front door •Damage caused by methamphetamine contamination.

I am satisfied that the damage to the walls, ceilings, and front door occurred during the tenancy, the damage is beyond fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for it.

The landlord has been mostly successful I its claim and I consider this an appropriate case to award payment of the Tribunal application fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4805762 — Cleanliness at Unit/Flat Flat 4, 7 Cecil Place, Waltham, Christchurch 8023

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4805762 — Cleanliness at Unit/Flat Flat 4, 7 Cecil Place, Waltham, Christchurch 8023

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Did the tenant comply with her 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 her 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