What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4846743 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] must pay

How much money was awarded in case 4846743?

Benchtop Oven (Depreciated: $120.00 awarded to landlord; Each: $1,400.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,528.40 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,100.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4846743?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4846743?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11672075-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4846743 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] must pay

How much money was awarded in case 4846743?

Benchtop Oven (Depreciated: $120.00 awarded to landlord; Each: $1,400.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,528.40 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,100.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4846743?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4846743?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11672075-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

13 Deveron Road, Manurewa, Auckland 2102 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4846743 — Property damage

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4846743 — net $4,148.40 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
each	$1,400.00	each
Lock/key replacement	$1,528.40	Lock/key replacement
Benchtop oven (depreciated	$120.00	Benchtop oven (depreciated
Compensation for loss of rent while repairs undertaken	$1,100.00	Compensation for loss of rent while repairs undertaken
Net award	$4,148.40
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,148.40

Order

[The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] must pay Slpm Limited as agent for M And [The landlord/s] $4,148.40 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

Only the landlord attended the hearing which was held by phone. The hearing was scheduled for hearing today from 2pm to 4pm. Due to technical difficulties the Tribunal the hearing could not begin as scheduled at 2pm. The Registry contacted the parties to let them know that the hearing would begin as soon as possible after 2.30pm.
The hearing began shortly after 2.30pm. A female answered the number provided for Ms Tahere but then terminated the call. The call to the number provided for Mr Martin went unanswered.
I am satisfied that the tenants have been served with the landlord’s claim in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The hearing therefore proceeded in the tenants’ absence.
The tenancy began on 17 September 2022. The tenants advised that they would be leaving on 11 April 2024 and returned one key shortly after.
On 7 August 2024 the Tribunal made orders for payment of rent arrears and water rates. The bond was released to the landlord. The landlord’s claims (compensation for cleaning, rubbish removal, damage and loss of rent while repairs were undertaken) were adjourned for further hearing.
The landlord’s claims were set down for hearing on 30 October 2024. However that hearing was adjourned due to the landlord waiting for further information from their insurer.
The landlord now has the required insurance informatioin for the hearing today.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, 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 and are they responsible for damage? Cleaning, rubbish removal and damage
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.
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.
The landlord produced photos from the start of the tenancy showing the property to be in reasonably tidy condition, reports and photos from various inspections during the tenancy and then an exit inspection report and photos.
The report and photos show that tenants did not leave the property reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The tenants do appear to have cleaned the house to some extent but there were a large number of items left behind including furniture. There were clear visible marks on some walls and on the bathroom vanity. Cockroaches were present in the kitchen. The lawns were not mowed. Various furniture was left strewn outside and throughout the garage, the garage had various rubbish and debris all over the floor. There were some holes in the walls, tagging on a door, a broken electrical outlet and a broken window. Some cupboard doors were missing in the kitchen. Various paint was scratched and scuffed, particularly on several doors.
The landlord produced an invoice for cleaning, rubbish removal and repairs in the amount of $22,890.75.
The landlord said that their insurer has covered much of the invoice other than the portions that were considered to be maintenance/wear and tear.
The landlord’s insurer has applied two excess amounts of $700 each, a total of $1,400.00. The landlord seeks recovery of this amount.
Having reviewed the evidence produced by the landlord I consider that the landlord has proven that the tenants did not leave the property reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. I consider that some of the damage is simply wear and tear due to the age of the property but the landlord has proven that a considerable portion occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear.
The portion of the invoice that I would have found proven for cleaning, rubbish removal and repairs is far higher than the excess amounts claimed. I therefore order the excess amounts claimed by the landlord of $1,400.00. Locks
The landlord said that they provided 9 keys to various locks at the start of the tenancy but only one key was returned. The landlord produced photos from the start of the tenancy showing the keys. The landlord said that it was clear that the tenants had returned to the property after they had left as some items left behind had been moved, and so they realised that the tenants had retained some keys.
In the circumstances the landlord has changed the locks. I consider this to be reasonable. All but one lock was left without keys. The landlord produced an invoice in the amount $1,526.00 for supplying the additional 8 locks. This claim is proved. Missing chattels
The landlord claimed for some missing chattels but the only chattel I found proved (by ingoing and outgoing inspection photos and reports) was the benchtop oven in the sleepout.
The landlord claimed the sum of $159.00 for the benchtop oven and produced and invoice from Bunnings for this amount. Some depreciation is required as the landlord now has a new benchtop. I consider that the amount of $120.00 is appropriate in all the circumstances and order that amount. Loss of rent
The landlord said that the property was empty from the date the tenant left on 11 April until it was re-let on 24 May 2024. They landlord says that the repairs were extensive and they seek to recover at least a portion of rent during the period that the repairs took place.
I have reviewed the ingoing and outgoing inspection photos carefully. It is my impression that while there was cleaning, rubbish removal and repairs that are the responsibility of the tenant, the property was tired and need of refurbishment and the landlord has taken the opportunity to do-up the property following this tenancy.
I consider that the landlord is entitled to compensation of one week of rent from the tenants ($1,100.00), this being the amount of time I estimate would have been required to do the work that was the responsibility of the tenants. Filing fee and name suppression
The filing fee was refunded in the previous order for rent arrears and so no further refund is required.
The landlord did not seek an order for name suppression.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4846743 — net $4,148.40 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
each	$1,400.00	each
Lock/key replacement	$1,528.40	Lock/key replacement
Benchtop oven (depreciated	$120.00	Benchtop oven (depreciated
Compensation for loss of rent while repairs undertaken	$1,100.00	Compensation for loss of rent while repairs undertaken
Net award	$4,148.40
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,148.40

Order

[The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] must pay Slpm Limited as agent for M And [The landlord/s] $4,148.40 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

Only the landlord attended the hearing which was held by phone. The hearing was scheduled for hearing today from 2pm to 4pm. Due to technical difficulties the Tribunal the hearing could not begin as scheduled at 2pm. The Registry contacted the parties to let them know that the hearing would begin as soon as possible after 2.30pm.
The hearing began shortly after 2.30pm. A female answered the number provided for Ms Tahere but then terminated the call. The call to the number provided for Mr Martin went unanswered.
I am satisfied that the tenants have been served with the landlord’s claim in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The hearing therefore proceeded in the tenants’ absence.
The tenancy began on 17 September 2022. The tenants advised that they would be leaving on 11 April 2024 and returned one key shortly after.
On 7 August 2024 the Tribunal made orders for payment of rent arrears and water rates. The bond was released to the landlord. The landlord’s claims (compensation for cleaning, rubbish removal, damage and loss of rent while repairs were undertaken) were adjourned for further hearing.
The landlord’s claims were set down for hearing on 30 October 2024. However that hearing was adjourned due to the landlord waiting for further information from their insurer.
The landlord now has the required insurance informatioin for the hearing today.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, 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 and are they responsible for damage? Cleaning, rubbish removal and damage
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.
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.
The landlord produced photos from the start of the tenancy showing the property to be in reasonably tidy condition, reports and photos from various inspections during the tenancy and then an exit inspection report and photos.
The report and photos show that tenants did not leave the property reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The tenants do appear to have cleaned the house to some extent but there were a large number of items left behind including furniture. There were clear visible marks on some walls and on the bathroom vanity. Cockroaches were present in the kitchen. The lawns were not mowed. Various furniture was left strewn outside and throughout the garage, the garage had various rubbish and debris all over the floor. There were some holes in the walls, tagging on a door, a broken electrical outlet and a broken window. Some cupboard doors were missing in the kitchen. Various paint was scratched and scuffed, particularly on several doors.
The landlord produced an invoice for cleaning, rubbish removal and repairs in the amount of $22,890.75.
The landlord said that their insurer has covered much of the invoice other than the portions that were considered to be maintenance/wear and tear.
The landlord’s insurer has applied two excess amounts of $700 each, a total of $1,400.00. The landlord seeks recovery of this amount.
Having reviewed the evidence produced by the landlord I consider that the landlord has proven that the tenants did not leave the property reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. I consider that some of the damage is simply wear and tear due to the age of the property but the landlord has proven that a considerable portion occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear.
The portion of the invoice that I would have found proven for cleaning, rubbish removal and repairs is far higher than the excess amounts claimed. I therefore order the excess amounts claimed by the landlord of $1,400.00. Locks
The landlord said that they provided 9 keys to various locks at the start of the tenancy but only one key was returned. The landlord produced photos from the start of the tenancy showing the keys. The landlord said that it was clear that the tenants had returned to the property after they had left as some items left behind had been moved, and so they realised that the tenants had retained some keys.
In the circumstances the landlord has changed the locks. I consider this to be reasonable. All but one lock was left without keys. The landlord produced an invoice in the amount $1,526.00 for supplying the additional 8 locks. This claim is proved. Missing chattels
The landlord claimed for some missing chattels but the only chattel I found proved (by ingoing and outgoing inspection photos and reports) was the benchtop oven in the sleepout.
The landlord claimed the sum of $159.00 for the benchtop oven and produced and invoice from Bunnings for this amount. Some depreciation is required as the landlord now has a new benchtop. I consider that the amount of $120.00 is appropriate in all the circumstances and order that amount. Loss of rent
The landlord said that the property was empty from the date the tenant left on 11 April until it was re-let on 24 May 2024. They landlord says that the repairs were extensive and they seek to recover at least a portion of rent during the period that the repairs took place.
I have reviewed the ingoing and outgoing inspection photos carefully. It is my impression that while there was cleaning, rubbish removal and repairs that are the responsibility of the tenant, the property was tired and need of refurbishment and the landlord has taken the opportunity to do-up the property following this tenancy.
I consider that the landlord is entitled to compensation of one week of rent from the tenants ($1,100.00), this being the amount of time I estimate would have been required to do the work that was the responsibility of the tenants. Filing fee and name suppression
The filing fee was refunded in the previous order for rent arrears and so no further refund is required.
The landlord did not seek an order for name suppression.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4846743 — Property damage at 13 Deveron Road, Manurewa, Auckland 2102

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4846743 — Property damage at 13 Deveron Road, Manurewa, Auckland 2102

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions