What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4834240 about?

The tribunal order states: Vipin Varghese and Bilgy Thomas are to pay [The landlord/s] $658.40 from the

How much money was awarded in case 4834240?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4834240?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4834240?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10591439-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4834240 about?

The tribunal order states: Vipin Varghese and Bilgy Thomas are to pay [The landlord/s] $658.40 from the

How much money was awarded in case 4834240?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4834240?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4834240?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10591439-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4834240 — Tenancy dispute

Order

Vipin Varghese and Bilgy Thomas are to pay [The landlord/s] $658.40 from the bond.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,470.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: [The landlord/s]: $658.40 Vipin Varghese and Bilgy Thomas: $811.60

Reasons

All parties attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for compensation from the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

Are the tenanst responsible for the damage to the carpet?

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. See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA.
I am satisfied the lounge carpet was stained during the tenancy to an extent that it had to be replaced. This conclusion has been reached after seeing inspection photos taken during and at the end of the tenancy.

How much do the tenants owe for carpet damage?

The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenants not breached their obligations and should not be better or worse off. In calculating depreciation, I have taken into account the age and condition of the carpet at the start of the tenancy and its likely useful lifespan. To account for age and the quality I have allowed eight and a half years of use lost on a carpet life of twelve years.
The carpet was new in August 2020. The landlord replaced the carpet with a slightly inferior carpet with a thicker underlay at a cost of $1,334.00. To replace the lounge carpet with the same quality as the rest of the house, the cost would have been $1,760.00. The landlord has claimed the depreciated value on $1,760.00, not the replacement carpet cost of $1,334.00.
The landlord’s actual loss is the amount spent on replacement carpet. If the rent received for the property had to be reduced because of the lesser quality carpet, that would also be an actual loss. That did not happen.
The difference in cost between the two carpets is not an actual loss. It is a possible future loss. The landlord will only experience that loss if the inferior carpet does not last as long as the superior carpet. The owner may never experience a loss from using a carpet that does not last as long as the original carpet. For example, the owner may sell the property before the replacement carpet needs replacing, or there could be an earthquake, fire or flood at the property before the end of the carpet’s life. In these cases the landlord will not suffer a loss from a lesser quality of carpet because it will not reach the end of its useful life. The Tribunal does not make orders regarding future losses because they may not be experienced. Therefore the Tribunal order is based on the actual loss of $1,334.00 for replacement carpet.
The application of deprecation, being eight and a half years use lost on a carpet life of twelve years, establishes the landlord’s loss to be $944.92 for the lounge carpet.
The tenants overpaid for lawn and garden work by $286.52. The balance to be paid to the landlord from the bond is $658.40. Filing Fee
No filing fee is ordered. Both the tenants and landlord were partially successful with their claims. Name Suppression
Because the landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim for carpet compensation, the landlord’s request for name suppression is granted. (see Section 95A(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986).
The tenants were not substantially successful in their claim for the full bond. Suppression of their names cannot be granted.

Reasons

All parties attended the hearing.

The landlord has applied for compensation from the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

Are the tenanst responsible for the damage to the carpet?

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. See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA.

I am satisfied the lounge carpet was stained during the tenancy to an extent that it had to be replaced. This conclusion has been reached after seeing inspection photos taken during and at the end of the tenancy.

How much do the tenants owe for carpet damage?

The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenants not breached their obligations and should not be better or worse off. In calculating depreciation, I have taken into account the age and condition of the carpet at the start of the tenancy and its likely useful lifespan. To account for age and the quality I have allowed eight and a half years of use lost on a carpet life of twelve years.

The carpet was new in August 2020. The landlord replaced the carpet with a slightly inferior carpet with a thicker underlay at a cost of $1,334.00. To replace the lounge carpet with the same quality as the rest of the house, the cost would have been $1,760.00. The landlord has claimed the depreciated value on $1,760.00, not the replacement carpet cost of $1,334.00.

The landlord’s actual loss is the amount spent on replacement carpet. If the rent received for the property had to be reduced because of the lesser quality carpet, that would also be an actual loss. That did not happen.

The difference in cost between the two carpets is not an actual loss. It is a possible future loss. The landlord will only experience that loss if the inferior carpet does not last as long as the superior carpet. The owner may never experience a loss from using a carpet that does not last as long as the original carpet. For example, the owner may sell the property before the replacement carpet needs replacing, or there could be an earthquake, fire or flood at the property before the end of the carpet’s life. In these cases the landlord will not suffer a loss from a lesser quality of carpet because it will not reach the end of its useful life. The Tribunal does not make orders regarding future losses because they may not be experienced. Therefore the Tribunal order is based on the actual loss of $1,334.00 for replacement carpet.

The application of deprecation, being eight and a half years use lost on a carpet life of twelve years, establishes the landlord’s loss to be $944.92 for the lounge carpet.

The tenants overpaid for lawn and garden work by $286.52. The balance to be paid to the landlord from the bond is $658.40. Filing Fee

No filing fee is ordered. Both the tenants and landlord were partially successful with their claims. Name Suppression

Because the landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim for carpet compensation, the landlord’s request for name suppression is granted. (see Section 95A(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986).

The tenants were not substantially successful in their claim for the full bond. Suppression of their names cannot be granted.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4834240 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 4834240 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Are the tenanst responsible for the damage to the carpet?

How much do the tenants owe for carpet damage?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Are the tenanst responsible for the damage to the carpet?

How much do the tenants owe for carpet damage?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions