What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4838725?

The tribunal order states: The Tenant is to pay $4,399.42 immediately, calculated as follows:

How much money was awarded in case 4838725?

Filing Fee: $4,399.42 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4838725?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Smoke alarms, Cleanliness, Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4838725?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10237610-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4838725?

The tribunal order states: The Tenant is to pay $4,399.42 immediately, calculated as follows:

How much money was awarded in case 4838725?

Filing Fee: $4,399.42 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4838725?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Smoke alarms, Cleanliness, Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4838725?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10237610-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

38 Mountain Road, Western Heights, ROTORUA 3010 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4838725 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

38 Mountain Road, Western Heights, ROTORUA 3010 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4838725 — Rent arrears | TenantCheck

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4838725. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
50.00 Net Curtains for Bedroom Damaged by Dogs72.00 Glass Breakage (replacement cost)208.72 Application filing fee20.44	$4,399.42		50.00 Net Curtains for Bedroom Damaged by Dogs72.00 Glass Breakage (replacement cost)208.72 Application filing fee20.44

Claims and awards for application 4838725. Verify on MoJ.

50.00 Net Curtains for Bedroom Damaged by Dogs72.00 Glass Breakage (replacement cost)208.72 Application filing fee20.44

Amount: $4,399.42
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: 50.00 Net Curtains for Bedroom Damaged by Dogs72.00 Glass Breakage (replacement cost)208.72 Application filing fee20.44

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Filing Fee

Order

The Tenant is to pay $4,399.42 immediately, calculated as follows: Description of AwardAmount ($) Rent Arrears (as of 02/02/2024)2,057.14 Cleaning Charges (24 hours of cleaning required)960.00 Rubbish Tip Charges (removal of left behind rubbish)125.76 Change of Lock (due to lost keys)89.95 Mowing of Lawns (restoration of grounds)225.00 Missing Smoke Alarm (replacement cost)12.43 Missing Bedroom Drapes (replacement cost)84.98 Bedroom Door Repair (damage beyond wear and tear)55.00 Ranch Slider Net Curtain (damaged by dogs)33.00 Double Beds Damaged by Dogs (replacement cost)150.00 Carpet Burned by Smoking Inside (damage repair)100.00 Hole in Dining Wall Gibboard (damage repair)55.00 Armchair Destroyed by Dog (replacement cost)150.00 Net Curtains for Bedroom Damaged by Dogs72.00 Glass Breakage (replacement cost)208.72 Application filing fee20.44 Total Amount Awarded$4,399.42

Reasons

The Landlord attended the hearing. The Tenant did not attend the hearing and was not available when called.
The Landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 2 February 2024. The Landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy: $2,057.14

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: s 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Cleaning Charges ($960.00): The Tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The Landlord explained how the property was left in a significantly poorer condition than at tenancy commencement. The Landlord has provided detailed accounts of the required cleaning, including the dog faeces which required removal from the carpet. I award the Landlord’s cleaning claim.
Rubbish Tip Charges ($125.76): Charges for removing excess rubbish are justified when reference is had to the Landlord’s photographs of the rubbish left behind by the Tenants.
Change of Lock ($89.95): The lock change was necessitated by the Tenants losing the keys. Without contrary evidence from the Tenants, this claim stands.
Mowing of Lawns ($225.00): The Landlord explained how the Tenants would never have mowed the lawns once during the Tenancy. I cannot establish whether they did or not but looking at the state of the laws and surrounds, at the start of the premises, and at the end, I am satisfied extensive work would have been required to bring the grounds back to their original state.
Missing Smoke Alarm ($12.43): A missing smoke alarm points to removal or damage by the Tenants. The Tenants are liable for its cost.
Missing Bedroom Drapes ($84.98): The disappearance of drapes is not wear and tear but indicates removal by the tenant. Without evidence from the tenant disproving responsibility, the cost of replacement is rightly claimed by the landlord and is approved.
The amounts ordered are proved.

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 RTA.
Where the damage is careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.
Where the damage is caused carelessly, and is covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to the lesser of the insurance excess or four weeks' rent (or four weeks' market rent in the case of a tenant paying income- related rent). See section 49B(3)(a) RTA.
Where the damage is careless and is not covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to four weeks' rent (or market rent). See section 49B(3)(b) RTA. Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. See section 49B(3A)(a) RTA.
Tenants are liable for the cost of repairing damage that is intentional or which results from any activity at the premises that is an imprisonable offence. This applies to anything the tenant does and anything done by a person they are responsible for. See section 49B(1) RTA.
Damage is intentional where a person intends to cause damage and takes the necessary steps to achieve that purpose. Damage is also intentional where a person does something, or allows a situation to continue, knowing that damage is a certainty. See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.
The following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. Bedroom Door Repair ($55.00): The damage to the bedroom door is not typical wear and tear. The Landlord’s photo evidence shows significant physical damage consistent with forceful impact or mishandling. b. Ranch Slider Net Curtain ($33.00): Curtains generally undergo normal wear; however, the damage described and shown indicates tearing or excessive misuse, which is beyond fair wear and tear, likely caused by the dogs inside, which the Landlord has provided photographs of, with their paws on the windowsills and marks on the ranchslider indicative of the dogs having had their paws there. Since no evidence suggests natural degradation, the tenant is responsible for replacement costs. The Landlord pointed to a term in the Tenancy Agreement which states that dogs are allowed during the tenancy but are to be kept outside the premises. c. Double Beds Damaged by Dogs ($150.00): Dogs causing damage to furniture is a clear case of negligence where the tenant failed to prevent their pet from damaging property. The beds’ frames and mattresses appear to have been damaged by a dog. This is directly attributable to the Tenant's lack of care and supervision, making them liable for the full replacement cost. d. Carpet Burned by Smoking Inside ($100.00): The burn marks on carpet are intentional damage. The Tenants have not attended to disprove liability. e. Hole in Dining Wall Gibboard ($55.00): The Landlord found a hole in wall which it has repaired. The Tenants have not provided any justification or evidence to disprove the damage. f. Armchair Destroyed by Dog ($150.00): Like the beds, damage to furniture by pets is due to the Tenants’ failure to control their dog. The Tenants are responsible for the cost of replacing or repairing the armchair. The armchair was second-hand, purchased from an elderly couple, but the Landlord said it was in immaculate condition at the start of the tenancy. g. Net Curtains for Bedroom Damaged by Dogs ($72.00): As with other pet- related damages, the torn curtains are a direct result of tenant negligence, in allowing the dogs to cause damage inside the home, making them liable for replacement costs. h. Glass Breakage ($208.72): Glass windows were broken during the tenancy. No justification has been given by the Tenants. The Landlord was not informed when the breakage occurred. The Tenant is responsible for the full replacement cost.
The amounts ordered are proved. I have taken into account betterment and depreciation, but the Landlord’s claims are not on their own unreasonable or excessive. The Landlord is not expecting to be returned to a better position than he would have been in had the Tenants not breached their obligations.
Because Geyserland Limited has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee:$20.44.

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4838725. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
50.00 Net Curtains for Bedroom Damaged by Dogs72.00 Glass Breakage (replacement cost)208.72 Application filing fee20.44	$4,399.42		50.00 Net Curtains for Bedroom Damaged by Dogs72.00 Glass Breakage (replacement cost)208.72 Application filing fee20.44

Claims and awards for application 4838725. Verify on MoJ.

50.00 Net Curtains for Bedroom Damaged by Dogs72.00 Glass Breakage (replacement cost)208.72 Application filing fee20.44

Amount: $4,399.42
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: 50.00 Net Curtains for Bedroom Damaged by Dogs72.00 Glass Breakage (replacement cost)208.72 Application filing fee20.44

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Filing Fee

Order

The Tenant is to pay $4,399.42 immediately, calculated as follows: Description of AwardAmount ($) Rent Arrears (as of 02/02/2024)2,057.14 Cleaning Charges (24 hours of cleaning required)960.00 Rubbish Tip Charges (removal of left behind rubbish)125.76 Change of Lock (due to lost keys)89.95 Mowing of Lawns (restoration of grounds)225.00 Missing Smoke Alarm (replacement cost)12.43 Missing Bedroom Drapes (replacement cost)84.98 Bedroom Door Repair (damage beyond wear and tear)55.00 Ranch Slider Net Curtain (damaged by dogs)33.00 Double Beds Damaged by Dogs (replacement cost)150.00 Carpet Burned by Smoking Inside (damage repair)100.00 Hole in Dining Wall Gibboard (damage repair)55.00 Armchair Destroyed by Dog (replacement cost)150.00 Net Curtains for Bedroom Damaged by Dogs72.00 Glass Breakage (replacement cost)208.72 Application filing fee20.44 Total Amount Awarded$4,399.42

Reasons

The Landlord attended the hearing. The Tenant did not attend the hearing and was not available when called.
The Landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 2 February 2024. The Landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy: $2,057.14

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: s 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Cleaning Charges ($960.00): The Tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The Landlord explained how the property was left in a significantly poorer condition than at tenancy commencement. The Landlord has provided detailed accounts of the required cleaning, including the dog faeces which required removal from the carpet. I award the Landlord’s cleaning claim.
Rubbish Tip Charges ($125.76): Charges for removing excess rubbish are justified when reference is had to the Landlord’s photographs of the rubbish left behind by the Tenants.
Change of Lock ($89.95): The lock change was necessitated by the Tenants losing the keys. Without contrary evidence from the Tenants, this claim stands.
Mowing of Lawns ($225.00): The Landlord explained how the Tenants would never have mowed the lawns once during the Tenancy. I cannot establish whether they did or not but looking at the state of the laws and surrounds, at the start of the premises, and at the end, I am satisfied extensive work would have been required to bring the grounds back to their original state.
Missing Smoke Alarm ($12.43): A missing smoke alarm points to removal or damage by the Tenants. The Tenants are liable for its cost.
Missing Bedroom Drapes ($84.98): The disappearance of drapes is not wear and tear but indicates removal by the tenant. Without evidence from the tenant disproving responsibility, the cost of replacement is rightly claimed by the landlord and is approved.
The amounts ordered are proved.

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 RTA.
Where the damage is careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.
Where the damage is caused carelessly, and is covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to the lesser of the insurance excess or four weeks' rent (or four weeks' market rent in the case of a tenant paying income- related rent). See section 49B(3)(a) RTA.
Where the damage is careless and is not covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to four weeks' rent (or market rent). See section 49B(3)(b) RTA. Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. See section 49B(3A)(a) RTA.
Tenants are liable for the cost of repairing damage that is intentional or which results from any activity at the premises that is an imprisonable offence. This applies to anything the tenant does and anything done by a person they are responsible for. See section 49B(1) RTA.
Damage is intentional where a person intends to cause damage and takes the necessary steps to achieve that purpose. Damage is also intentional where a person does something, or allows a situation to continue, knowing that damage is a certainty. See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.
The following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. Bedroom Door Repair ($55.00): The damage to the bedroom door is not typical wear and tear. The Landlord’s photo evidence shows significant physical damage consistent with forceful impact or mishandling. b. Ranch Slider Net Curtain ($33.00): Curtains generally undergo normal wear; however, the damage described and shown indicates tearing or excessive misuse, which is beyond fair wear and tear, likely caused by the dogs inside, which the Landlord has provided photographs of, with their paws on the windowsills and marks on the ranchslider indicative of the dogs having had their paws there. Since no evidence suggests natural degradation, the tenant is responsible for replacement costs. The Landlord pointed to a term in the Tenancy Agreement which states that dogs are allowed during the tenancy but are to be kept outside the premises. c. Double Beds Damaged by Dogs ($150.00): Dogs causing damage to furniture is a clear case of negligence where the tenant failed to prevent their pet from damaging property. The beds’ frames and mattresses appear to have been damaged by a dog. This is directly attributable to the Tenant's lack of care and supervision, making them liable for the full replacement cost. d. Carpet Burned by Smoking Inside ($100.00): The burn marks on carpet are intentional damage. The Tenants have not attended to disprove liability. e. Hole in Dining Wall Gibboard ($55.00): The Landlord found a hole in wall which it has repaired. The Tenants have not provided any justification or evidence to disprove the damage. f. Armchair Destroyed by Dog ($150.00): Like the beds, damage to furniture by pets is due to the Tenants’ failure to control their dog. The Tenants are responsible for the cost of replacing or repairing the armchair. The armchair was second-hand, purchased from an elderly couple, but the Landlord said it was in immaculate condition at the start of the tenancy. g. Net Curtains for Bedroom Damaged by Dogs ($72.00): As with other pet- related damages, the torn curtains are a direct result of tenant negligence, in allowing the dogs to cause damage inside the home, making them liable for replacement costs. h. Glass Breakage ($208.72): Glass windows were broken during the tenancy. No justification has been given by the Tenants. The Landlord was not informed when the breakage occurred. The Tenant is responsible for the full replacement cost.
The amounts ordered are proved. I have taken into account betterment and depreciation, but the Landlord’s claims are not on their own unreasonable or excessive. The Landlord is not expecting to be returned to a better position than he would have been in had the Tenants not breached their obligations.
Because Geyserland Limited has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee:$20.44.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4838725 — Rent arrears at 38 Mountain Road, Western Heights, ROTORUA 3010

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4838725 — Rent arrears at 38 Mountain Road, Western Heights, ROTORUA 3010

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

Are the Tenants responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

Are the Tenants responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions