What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4825337?

The tribunal order states: The landlord’s claim is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4825337?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4825337?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4825337?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10590111-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4825337?

The tribunal order states: The landlord’s claim is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4825337?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4825337?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4825337?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10590111-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

5B Himalaya Crescent, Lynfield, Auckland 1042 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4825337 — Tenancy dispute

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

The landlord has applied for compensation 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 landlord says the tenants did not leave the yard reasonably clean and tidy in that the ferns underneath and alongside the front of the deck had grown and expanded over the duration of the tenancy.

The landlord has applied for compensation for $172.50 that it cost to have the ferns trimmed back and the green waste removed.

The landlord confirmed the tenancy had been on foot since around 2012 and that the tenants had looked after the property well during their tenancy.

There had been a number of property management company’s acting as agent’s for the owner during the tenancy, as such the property manager did not have access to entry inspection photographs or routine property inspection reports/ photographs. As such, the landlord was unable to prove the tenants should be held liable for the trimming of the ferns.

I was unclear when the photographs of the ferns were taken, as they were not date stamped, and note the work was done on the property more than 2 months after the end of the tenancy. As such, I am not satisfied these photographs accurately represent the state of the ferns on vacate date.

I also note the application for reimbursement of this cost was not made until nearly 5 months after the tenancy ended, when the male tenant said his exit inspection had gone well and he had left the house in excellent condition inside and out. He stated he was very confused when he got the application from the landlord out of the blue 5 months after his tenancy ended when there had been no discussion with him about the issue.

The tenant says he kept the trees trimmed and the lawns mown and undertook regular garden maintenance and had he been asked from the start of the tenancy to keep these ferns trimmed back, he would have. He says he has never been responsible for keeping these ferns trimmed back and none of the property managers have ever asked him to do so.

I dismiss the landlord’s claim as the landlord had not proven the claim, due to lack of evidence the tenant should be held responsible for reimbursing the landlord for costs sought.

The landlord’s application for reimbursement of the filing fee is dismissed because the landlord did not wholly or substantially succeed in its claims.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

The landlord has applied for compensation 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?

The landlord has applied for compensation for $172.50 that it cost to have the ferns trimmed back and the green waste removed.

The landlord confirmed the tenancy had been on foot since around 2012 and that the tenants had looked after the property well during their tenancy.

I dismiss the landlord’s claim as the landlord had not proven the claim, due to lack of evidence the tenant should be held responsible for reimbursing the landlord for costs sought.

The landlord’s application for reimbursement of the filing fee is dismissed because the landlord did not wholly or substantially succeed in its claims.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4825337 — Tenancy dispute at 5B Himalaya Crescent, Lynfield, Auckland 1042

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4825337 — Tenancy dispute at 5B Himalaya Crescent, Lynfield, Auckland 1042

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Property management

Frequently asked questions