What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4839087 about?

The tribunal order states: Claudia Rose Black and Alina Jayde Black must pay [The landlord/s] $1,262.31

How much money was awarded in case 4839087?

Cleaning: $1,106.16 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $464.29 awarded to tenant; two large holes in the walls and pai…: $600.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4839087?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4839087?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10741481-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4839087 about?

The tribunal order states: Claudia Rose Black and Alina Jayde Black must pay [The landlord/s] $1,262.31

How much money was awarded in case 4839087?

Cleaning: $1,106.16 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $464.29 awarded to tenant; two large holes in the walls and pai…: $600.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4839087?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4839087?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10741481-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Room Suite 14, 9 Ebor Street, Te Aro, Wellington 6011, Tenancy Tribunal Case 4839087 — Cleanliness

Tenantcheck Insights

Room Suite 14, 9 Ebor Street, Te Aro, Wellington 6011, Tenancy Tribunal Case 4839087 — Cleanliness | 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 4839087 — net $1,262.31 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Carpet Cleaning: and deoderising	$1,106.16		Carpet Cleaning: and deoderising
Repairs: two large holes in the walls and painting	$600.00		Repairs: two large holes in the walls and painting
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44		Filing fee reimbursement
Credit from the bond (after the rent arrears were paid		$464.29	Credit from the bond (after the rent arrears were paid
Total award	$1,726.60	$464.29
Net award	$1,262.31
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,262.31

Claims and awards for application 4839087 — net $1,262.31 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Carpet Cleaning: and deoderising

Amount: $1,106.16
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Carpet Cleaning: and deoderising

Repairs: two large holes in the walls and painting

Amount: $600.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: two large holes in the walls and painting

Filing fee reimbursement

Amount: $20.44
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Filing fee reimbursement

Credit from the bond (after the rent arrears were paid

Amount: $464.29
Awarded to: Tenant
Reason: Credit from the bond (after the rent arrears were paid

Total award

Landlord $1,726.60 · Tenant $464.29

Net award

Landlord $1,262.31

Dismissed claims

Other Claims — All other claims dismissed

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Carpet Cleaning Filing Fee Rent arrears Property damage

Order

Claudia Rose Black and Alina Jayde Black must pay [The landlord/s] $1,262.31 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenants sent an apology and were offered a chance to appear by telephone. They did not reply to that email.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. The bond was refunded to the landlord in April. This was used to pay the rent arrears, leaving a credit of $464.29. The claims for rent arrears and the bond were withdrawn at the hearing.

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

There is a claim for cleaning. At the end of the tenancy the tenants 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)(c) and (e)(iii) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
The RTA does not require the premises to be provided or returned in a spotless or an immaculate condition. The standard is based on what an average bystander would consider reasonable, not on the subjective opinions of the landlord and tenant. There is no scientific way to determine what is reasonably clean and tidy, and the Tribunal must evaluate the evidence available, and in particular inspection reports and photographs.
The landlord’s photos were too small for me to decide that the house was not left reasonably clean and tidy. This claim is dismissed.
The landlord had good evidence about the state of the carpet at the start and at the end of the tenancy. The landlord said the tenants had cats and kittens inside. Jae went to the house and spent considerable time removing the smell of cat urine, drying the carpets and cleaning stains. The amount claimed seems reasonable to me.

Are the tenants responsible for the damage to the premises?

There is a claim for damage. 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.
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 landlord had good photos showing large holes in two of the walls in the lounge. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. It seems most likely to me the damage was intentional because of the number of holes and the state of the carpet. I have estimated an amount for the plaster repair and the painting because the invoice is not itemised.
The landlord has not proved the tenants damaged the light switch, the lightbulbs, the broken toilet seat, the blinds, and the paint on the balcony. These claims are dismissed. I note that I have also taken depreciation and betterment into account for the blinds and the toilet seat.
There is no proof the oven door was damaged by the tenants. The invoice states this was only a temporary fix. This claim is dismissed. Other orders
Because the landlord has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
The landlord’s application for suppression is allowed because the landlord is the most successful party.

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 4839087 — net $1,262.31 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Carpet Cleaning: and deoderising	$1,106.16		Carpet Cleaning: and deoderising
Repairs: two large holes in the walls and painting	$600.00		Repairs: two large holes in the walls and painting
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44		Filing fee reimbursement
Credit from the bond (after the rent arrears were paid		$464.29	Credit from the bond (after the rent arrears were paid
Total award	$1,726.60	$464.29
Net award	$1,262.31
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,262.31

Claims and awards for application 4839087 — net $1,262.31 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Carpet Cleaning: and deoderising

Amount: $1,106.16
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Carpet Cleaning: and deoderising

Repairs: two large holes in the walls and painting

Amount: $600.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: two large holes in the walls and painting

Filing fee reimbursement

Amount: $20.44
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Filing fee reimbursement

Credit from the bond (after the rent arrears were paid

Amount: $464.29
Awarded to: Tenant
Reason: Credit from the bond (after the rent arrears were paid

Total award

Landlord $1,726.60 · Tenant $464.29

Net award

Landlord $1,262.31

Dismissed claims

Other Claims — All other claims dismissed

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Carpet Cleaning Filing Fee Rent arrears Property damage

Order

Claudia Rose Black and Alina Jayde Black must pay [The landlord/s] $1,262.31 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenants sent an apology and were offered a chance to appear by telephone. They did not reply to that email.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. The bond was refunded to the landlord in April. This was used to pay the rent arrears, leaving a credit of $464.29. The claims for rent arrears and the bond were withdrawn at the hearing.

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

There is a claim for cleaning. At the end of the tenancy the tenants 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)(c) and (e)(iii) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
The RTA does not require the premises to be provided or returned in a spotless or an immaculate condition. The standard is based on what an average bystander would consider reasonable, not on the subjective opinions of the landlord and tenant. There is no scientific way to determine what is reasonably clean and tidy, and the Tribunal must evaluate the evidence available, and in particular inspection reports and photographs.
The landlord’s photos were too small for me to decide that the house was not left reasonably clean and tidy. This claim is dismissed.
The landlord had good evidence about the state of the carpet at the start and at the end of the tenancy. The landlord said the tenants had cats and kittens inside. Jae went to the house and spent considerable time removing the smell of cat urine, drying the carpets and cleaning stains. The amount claimed seems reasonable to me.

Are the tenants responsible for the damage to the premises?

There is a claim for damage. 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.
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 landlord had good photos showing large holes in two of the walls in the lounge. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. It seems most likely to me the damage was intentional because of the number of holes and the state of the carpet. I have estimated an amount for the plaster repair and the painting because the invoice is not itemised.
The landlord has not proved the tenants damaged the light switch, the lightbulbs, the broken toilet seat, the blinds, and the paint on the balcony. These claims are dismissed. I note that I have also taken depreciation and betterment into account for the blinds and the toilet seat.
There is no proof the oven door was damaged by the tenants. The invoice states this was only a temporary fix. This claim is dismissed. Other orders
Because the landlord has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
The landlord’s application for suppression is allowed because the landlord is the most successful party.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4839087 — Cleanliness at Room Suite 14, 9 Ebor Street, Te Aro, Wellington 6011,

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4839087 — Cleanliness at Room Suite 14, 9 Ebor Street, Te Aro, Wellington 6011,

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Did the tenants 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

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Did the tenants 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

Frequently asked questions