What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4822978?

The tribunal order states: Sarah Frances Williamson, Samuel James Stockwell, Michael Riha Fox and

How much money was awarded in case 4822978?

And Loren Maree Marvin To Pay Auckla…: $500.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4822978?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4822978?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10558104-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4822978?

The tribunal order states: Sarah Frances Williamson, Samuel James Stockwell, Michael Riha Fox and

How much money was awarded in case 4822978?

And Loren Maree Marvin To Pay Auckla…: $500.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4822978?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4822978?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10558104-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 101, 2A Raurenga Avenue, Royal Oak, Auckland Tenancy Tribunal Case 4822978 — Tenancy dispute

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4822978. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
and Loren Maree Marvin to pay Auckland Property Management Solutions Limited as agent for Barbara Leyland and Hekiara Pu	$500.00		and Loren Maree Marvin to pay Auckland Property Management Solutions Limited as agent for Barbara Leyland and Hekiara Pu
Bond	$3,400.00

Sarah Frances Williamson, Samuel James Stockwell, Michael Riha Fox and Loren Maree Marvin to pay Auckland Property Management Solutions Limited as agent for Barbara Leyland and Hekiara Puketapu $500.00 from the bond, as compensation for damage to wooden flooring.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,400.00 (6446261-009) immediately apportioned as follows: Auckland Property Management Solutions Limited as agent for Barbara Leyland and Hekiara Puketapu: $500.00 Sarah Frances Williamson, Samuel James Stockwell, Michael Riha Fox and Loren Maree Marvin: $2,900.00

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Mr Fox represented the tenants. Ms Young and Ms Scott represented the landlord. The owner of the premises Ms Leyland also attended.

The landlord has applied for compensation for sanding and resealing wooden flooring after damage caused by the tenants, part refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee.

Are the tenants 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 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).

Here, there was damage to areas of the wooden flooring one caused by a rinsed tin can being placed on the floor, the other caused by a pot plant being placed on the floor.

Mr Fox submitted that the damage was fair wear and tear, and not careless damage. He said the tenants were never given instructions about the care of the wooden flooring. But the same damage would likely have occurred had the flooring been say carpet. Regardless of the type of flooring, reasonable care is required.

The photos produced by the landlord prove that the damage was careless damage. Initially, the tenants appeared to accept that because they offered some compensation but that was not accepted by the landlord.

The quoted price to fully sand and apply 3 coats of polyurethane was $2,645.00. The quote was accepted, and the work was completed for that price after the tenants vacated and before the owner of the premises sold them.

The entire kitchen and dining room were sanded and coated.

The flooring was about 9 years old. Ms Young said the damaged areas could not be patch repaired as the repaired areas would have been obvious.

The landlord cannot reasonably expect to be reimbursed the cost of sanding the floors and recoating the entire kitchen and dining room. That would result in betterment, given the age of the flooring and the relatively small areas of damage.

A patch repair might not have been perfect, but the Tribunal finds that patch repairs would probably have been adequate. Given that the premises were to be sold, it is unlikely that 2 small areas of repaired wooden flooring, even if not perfect, would have reduced the sale price.

I find that compensation of $500.00 would be fair and reasonable for the careless damage the tenants caused to the wooden flooring. That takes account of depreciation and betterment including the likely time before the floors would have needed resealing even if not damaged.

The quote from Image Flooring notes that the flooring was sun damaged, and a full recoating was needed so the whole floor would age at the same rate. That does not justify the tenants bearing the cost of sanding and coating the floors. Result

The tenants will pay the landlord $500.00 from the bond.

The bond will be split between the parties - $500.00 to the landlord and $2,900.00 to the tenants.

I make no award of the filing fee as the application is only partly successful.

Upon my enquiry neither party sought a name suppression order.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4822978. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
and Loren Maree Marvin to pay Auckland Property Management Solutions Limited as agent for Barbara Leyland and Hekiara Pu	$500.00		and Loren Maree Marvin to pay Auckland Property Management Solutions Limited as agent for Barbara Leyland and Hekiara Pu
Bond	$3,400.00

Order

Sarah Frances Williamson, Samuel James Stockwell, Michael Riha Fox and Loren Maree Marvin to pay Auckland Property Management Solutions Limited as agent for Barbara Leyland and Hekiara Puketapu $500.00 from the bond, as compensation for damage to wooden flooring.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,400.00 (6446261-009) immediately apportioned as follows: Auckland Property Management Solutions Limited as agent for Barbara Leyland and Hekiara Puketapu: $500.00 Sarah Frances Williamson, Samuel James Stockwell, Michael Riha Fox and Loren Maree Marvin: $2,900.00

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Mr Fox represented the tenants. Ms Young and Ms Scott represented the landlord. The owner of the premises Ms Leyland also attended.
The landlord has applied for compensation for sanding and resealing wooden flooring after damage caused by the tenants, part refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee.

Are the tenants 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 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
Here, there was damage to areas of the wooden flooring one caused by a rinsed tin can being placed on the floor, the other caused by a pot plant being placed on the floor.
Mr Fox submitted that the damage was fair wear and tear, and not careless damage. He said the tenants were never given instructions about the care of the wooden flooring. But the same damage would likely have occurred had the flooring been say carpet. Regardless of the type of flooring, reasonable care is required.
The photos produced by the landlord prove that the damage was careless damage. Initially, the tenants appeared to accept that because they offered some compensation but that was not accepted by the landlord.
The quoted price to fully sand and apply 3 coats of polyurethane was $2,645.00. The quote was accepted, and the work was completed for that price after the tenants vacated and before the owner of the premises sold them.
The entire kitchen and dining room were sanded and coated.
The flooring was about 9 years old. Ms Young said the damaged areas could not be patch repaired as the repaired areas would have been obvious.
The landlord cannot reasonably expect to be reimbursed the cost of sanding the floors and recoating the entire kitchen and dining room. That would result in betterment, given the age of the flooring and the relatively small areas of damage.
A patch repair might not have been perfect, but the Tribunal finds that patch repairs would probably have been adequate. Given that the premises were to be sold, it is unlikely that 2 small areas of repaired wooden flooring, even if not perfect, would have reduced the sale price.
I find that compensation of $500.00 would be fair and reasonable for the careless damage the tenants caused to the wooden flooring. That takes account of depreciation and betterment including the likely time before the floors would have needed resealing even if not damaged.
The quote from Image Flooring notes that the flooring was sun damaged, and a full recoating was needed so the whole floor would age at the same rate. That does not justify the tenants bearing the cost of sanding and coating the floors. Result
The tenants will pay the landlord $500.00 from the bond.
The bond will be split between the parties - $500.00 to the landlord and $2,900.00 to the tenants.
I make no award of the filing fee as the application is only partly successful.
Upon my enquiry neither party sought a name suppression order.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4822978 — Tenancy dispute at Unit/Flat 101, 2A Raurenga Avenue, Royal Oak, Auckland

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4822978 — Tenancy dispute at Unit/Flat 101, 2A Raurenga Avenue, Royal Oak, Auckland

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Are the tenants responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Are the tenants responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Property management

Frequently asked questions