What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4835680?

The tribunal order states: Elizabeth Dianne Walsh must pay East Coast Realty Ltd T/A Harcourts As

How much money was awarded in case 4835680?

Cleaning: $1,207.50 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $763.73 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4835680?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4835680?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10246974-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4835680?

The tribunal order states: Elizabeth Dianne Walsh must pay East Coast Realty Ltd T/A Harcourts As

How much money was awarded in case 4835680?

Cleaning: $1,207.50 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $763.73 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4835680?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4835680?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10246974-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

255 Stout Street, Mangapapa, Gisborne 4010 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4835680 — Cleanliness

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4835680 — net $1,991.67 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rubbish removal	$763.73	Rubbish removal
Cleaning	$1,207.50	Cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,991.67
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,991.67

Order

Elizabeth Dianne Walsh must pay East Coast Realty Ltd T/A Harcourts As Agent For Shamim Chagani $1,991.67 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

Mr Third attended the teleconference hearing on behalf of the landlord. Ms Walsh, the tenant, also attended the teleconference hearing. The other tenant named in the Tenancy Agreement had passed away.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
Mr Third confirmed that the landlord’s rent arrears claim was only in relation to a previous Tribunal order made on 16 January 2024 in application #4773941, which terminated the tenancy and ordered rent arrears to the end of the tenancy on 26 January 2024, as well as reimbursement of the filing fee. The landlord further claimed the filing fee of $20.44 ordered in application #4773941.
The parties confirmed that an attachment order was sought by the landlord and made, and the tenant is paying regular repayments in that regard in relation to the Tribunal’s order in application #4773941. As that order has been enforced and no further rent arrears amount is sought by the landlord, I dismiss the landlord’s rent arrears claim and claim for the filing fee of $20.44 from application #4773941. I further decline to combine this order with the earlier made on 16 January 2024 in application #4773941.

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 said the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. Cleaning
The statutory requirement is that tenants leave the premises in a reasonably clean and reasonably tidy condition. The Residential Tenancies Act 1986 allows for fair wear and tear. A tenant is not required to leave a property spotless or even in a condition where the landlord would be happy to rent it out to a new tenant. What is required is that premises, including the stove and bathroom fittings are cleaned and all personal items removed. A tenant is not required to rigorously clean all walls, ceilings, lightshades, skirtings, behind appliances or the outside of the house. It is common that a landlord wishes to clean to this “extra” level so that they can re-tenant or sell. However, that is a business decision that a landlord makes at their cost.
Mr Third provided entry and exit inspection reports for the tenancy, with multiple photographs. It was clear from the exit inspection report that the tenant had not cleaned a number of windowsills, cupboards, kitchen cupboards, bath, toilet, vanity, floors, some carpets, inside porch, hot water cylinder floor and other areas.
Ms Walsh said she and two of her friends had cleaned the premises before she left but acknowledged that she didn’t check the level of some cleaning done by others, such as in the bathroom, and that they likely missed a number of areas such as all the windowsills, cupboards kitchen cupboards and ceilings. Ms Walsh said they did vacuum throughout and did as much as they could in a limited time.
The landlord claimed cleaning costs in the amount of $2,702.50 in an invoice from TurangaMaiNema Ltd dated 29 February 2024. This invoice included 40 hours of cleaning at an hourly rate of $55.00, cleaning products in the amount of $100.00 and one hour of rubbish removal @ $50.00/hour, as well as GST.
Ms Walsh believed that 40 hours of cleaning would not have been required for the condition in which she left the property and thought a more reasonable amount of time for cleaning what she missed would be 2.5 days of cleaning, which would be around 20 hours.
Mr Third acknowledged he was surprised at the number of hours claimed by the cleaning company in their invoice also and said probably around 25 hours of cleaning would be more reasonable.
Given the exit inspection report photographs, and considering what cleaning was done by Ms Walsh before she left and what would be considered reasonably clean and tidy, which may not include everything pointed out by the landlord, e.g. cleaning the ceilings, I find it reasonable given this evidence that 20 hours of cleaning would have been required to bring the property’s condition to a reasonable clean and tidy standard. I find $50.00/hour to be a reasonable rate for cleaning, rather than the $55.00/hour claimed. I allow the landlord 1 extra hour @ $50.00/hour for rubbish removal of inside rubbish by the cleaner, which comes to 21 hours @ $50.00/hour plus GST. Therefore, I award the landlord a total of $1,207.50 for cleaning and part of the inside rubbish removal, which is GST inclusive.
I do not allow the cleaner’s claim for $100.00 of cleaning products. This was a professional cleaning company who can reasonably be expected to provide the tools for the job, such as the cleaning products, the cost of which would be included in their rates. Rubbish removal
Mr Third pointed to a number of areas where the tenant left rubbish at the end of the tenancy. This included boxes of rubbish left outside the property, a garage full of rubbish, an old wheelbarrow, a trampoline, old furniture, old plastic on the lawn, an old TV cabinet, pictures, many boxes, bikes and other items.
Ms Walsh said she had removed some rubbish but acknowledged that she forgot to go back and collect a lot of her rubbish. She did not take issue with the rubbish pointed out by Mr Third that was left at the end of the tenancy.
The landlord claimed $763.73, which included 8 hours of time @ $45.00/hour, vehicle charge and 3 x tip fees. Given the amount of rubbish left, as shown in the landlord’s photographs and confirmed by the tenant, I find this a reasonable amount to clear and remove the rubbish left at the end of the tenancy, which was mostly exterior rubbish. Mr Third said there may have been some larger boxes in the kitchen and pictures in the hallway which had also been included in this rubbish removal claim. Therefore, I award the landlord $763.73 for rubbish removal.
The amounts ordered are proved.
Because East Coast Realty Ltd T/A Harcourts As Agent For Shamim Chagani has been successful with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4835680 — net $1,991.67 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rubbish removal	$763.73	Rubbish removal
Cleaning	$1,207.50	Cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,991.67
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,991.67

Order

Elizabeth Dianne Walsh must pay East Coast Realty Ltd T/A Harcourts As Agent For Shamim Chagani $1,991.67 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

Mr Third attended the teleconference hearing on behalf of the landlord. Ms Walsh, the tenant, also attended the teleconference hearing. The other tenant named in the Tenancy Agreement had passed away.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
Mr Third confirmed that the landlord’s rent arrears claim was only in relation to a previous Tribunal order made on 16 January 2024 in application #4773941, which terminated the tenancy and ordered rent arrears to the end of the tenancy on 26 January 2024, as well as reimbursement of the filing fee. The landlord further claimed the filing fee of $20.44 ordered in application #4773941.
The parties confirmed that an attachment order was sought by the landlord and made, and the tenant is paying regular repayments in that regard in relation to the Tribunal’s order in application #4773941. As that order has been enforced and no further rent arrears amount is sought by the landlord, I dismiss the landlord’s rent arrears claim and claim for the filing fee of $20.44 from application #4773941. I further decline to combine this order with the earlier made on 16 January 2024 in application #4773941.

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 said the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. Cleaning
The statutory requirement is that tenants leave the premises in a reasonably clean and reasonably tidy condition. The Residential Tenancies Act 1986 allows for fair wear and tear. A tenant is not required to leave a property spotless or even in a condition where the landlord would be happy to rent it out to a new tenant. What is required is that premises, including the stove and bathroom fittings are cleaned and all personal items removed. A tenant is not required to rigorously clean all walls, ceilings, lightshades, skirtings, behind appliances or the outside of the house. It is common that a landlord wishes to clean to this “extra” level so that they can re-tenant or sell. However, that is a business decision that a landlord makes at their cost.
Mr Third provided entry and exit inspection reports for the tenancy, with multiple photographs. It was clear from the exit inspection report that the tenant had not cleaned a number of windowsills, cupboards, kitchen cupboards, bath, toilet, vanity, floors, some carpets, inside porch, hot water cylinder floor and other areas.
Ms Walsh said she and two of her friends had cleaned the premises before she left but acknowledged that she didn’t check the level of some cleaning done by others, such as in the bathroom, and that they likely missed a number of areas such as all the windowsills, cupboards kitchen cupboards and ceilings. Ms Walsh said they did vacuum throughout and did as much as they could in a limited time.
The landlord claimed cleaning costs in the amount of $2,702.50 in an invoice from TurangaMaiNema Ltd dated 29 February 2024. This invoice included 40 hours of cleaning at an hourly rate of $55.00, cleaning products in the amount of $100.00 and one hour of rubbish removal @ $50.00/hour, as well as GST.
Ms Walsh believed that 40 hours of cleaning would not have been required for the condition in which she left the property and thought a more reasonable amount of time for cleaning what she missed would be 2.5 days of cleaning, which would be around 20 hours.
Mr Third acknowledged he was surprised at the number of hours claimed by the cleaning company in their invoice also and said probably around 25 hours of cleaning would be more reasonable.
Given the exit inspection report photographs, and considering what cleaning was done by Ms Walsh before she left and what would be considered reasonably clean and tidy, which may not include everything pointed out by the landlord, e.g. cleaning the ceilings, I find it reasonable given this evidence that 20 hours of cleaning would have been required to bring the property’s condition to a reasonable clean and tidy standard. I find $50.00/hour to be a reasonable rate for cleaning, rather than the $55.00/hour claimed. I allow the landlord 1 extra hour @ $50.00/hour for rubbish removal of inside rubbish by the cleaner, which comes to 21 hours @ $50.00/hour plus GST. Therefore, I award the landlord a total of $1,207.50 for cleaning and part of the inside rubbish removal, which is GST inclusive.
I do not allow the cleaner’s claim for $100.00 of cleaning products. This was a professional cleaning company who can reasonably be expected to provide the tools for the job, such as the cleaning products, the cost of which would be included in their rates. Rubbish removal
Mr Third pointed to a number of areas where the tenant left rubbish at the end of the tenancy. This included boxes of rubbish left outside the property, a garage full of rubbish, an old wheelbarrow, a trampoline, old furniture, old plastic on the lawn, an old TV cabinet, pictures, many boxes, bikes and other items.
Ms Walsh said she had removed some rubbish but acknowledged that she forgot to go back and collect a lot of her rubbish. She did not take issue with the rubbish pointed out by Mr Third that was left at the end of the tenancy.
The landlord claimed $763.73, which included 8 hours of time @ $45.00/hour, vehicle charge and 3 x tip fees. Given the amount of rubbish left, as shown in the landlord’s photographs and confirmed by the tenant, I find this a reasonable amount to clear and remove the rubbish left at the end of the tenancy, which was mostly exterior rubbish. Mr Third said there may have been some larger boxes in the kitchen and pictures in the hallway which had also been included in this rubbish removal claim. Therefore, I award the landlord $763.73 for rubbish removal.
The amounts ordered are proved.
Because East Coast Realty Ltd T/A Harcourts As Agent For Shamim Chagani has been successful with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4835680 — Cleanliness at 255 Stout Street, Mangapapa, Gisborne 4010

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4835680 — Cleanliness at 255 Stout Street, Mangapapa, Gisborne 4010

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions