How much money was awarded in case 4855668?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lightbulbs: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 4708470 D…: $20,620.44 awarded to tenant; Rent Arrears: $1,285.68 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4855668?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4855668?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10751311-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 4855668?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lightbulbs: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 4708470 D…: $20,620.44 awarded to tenant; Rent Arrears: $1,285.68 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4855668?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4855668?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10751311-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4855668 — Rent arrears

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4855668 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

Tenantcheck Insights

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4855668 — net $19,286.32 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears (26/09/22 to 07/10/2022	$1,285.68		Rent arrears (26/09/22 to 07/10/2022
Light bulbs/batteries	$28.00		Light bulbs/batteries
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44		Filing fee reimbursement
Previous order application 4708470 dated 25/04/2024		$20,620.44	Previous order application 4708470 dated 25/04/2024
Total award	$1,334.12	$20,620.44
Net award		$19,286.32
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant		$19,286.32

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant’s name and identifying details.

This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 25 April 2024 under application 4708470.

Roger Su must pay [the tenant] $19,286.32 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

Both parties attended 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. Prior Tribunal Order

On 8 April 2024 the Tribunal conducted a hearing to determine the tenant’s compensation claims (4708470). After time was given to the parties to produce additional evidence about the water tanks on the property, an Order was issued dated 25 April 2024.

The landlord filed this application for compensation (4855668) on 9 April 2024 and on 3 May 2024 he also filed an application for re-hearing of the 25 April Order.

The Tribunal dismissed his rehearing application on 3 May 2024, because Adjudicator King found, on balance, a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice had not occurred and was unlikely to occur.

The parties confirmed none of the $20,620.44 ordered had been paid as at today. The previous order 4708470 is incorporated into this Order for enforcement purposes.

The landlord confirmed he will pay the tenant the $19,286.32 owing, after today’s Order, by the end of this week. The tenant has confirmed he will continue with enforcement proceedings if the landlord has not paid the monies owing by 12noon on Friday 30 September 2024.

How much is owed for rent?

The evidence the tenant provided at the Tribunal hearing of application 4708470 tenancy confirmed the tenant provided written notice ending the tenancy on 9 September 2022. The tenant says he moved out of the property on 13 September 2022 and paid rent up to 25 September 2022.

The tenant is required to give the landlord 28 days written notice. 28 days from 9 September 2022 is 7 October 2022. Therefore, the tenancy ended on 7 October 2022 and owes the landlord 12 days rent for the period 26 September to 7 October 2022.

The landlord says the tenant retained the house keys and had left personal belonging at the premise until 21 November 2022 and he wanted to charge the tenant rent to this date. The tenant confirmed his keys were left at the property under the steps to the entrance of the house and that after 13 September 2022 he and his family had no reason to enter the house. Further, he says the landlord gave him the combination to the lock placed on the gate so the tenant could go back to pick up personal belongings from the lower paddock he had been unable to remove due to severe flooding making this area of the property inaccessible, even with a 4-wheel drive vehicle. There were text messages produced by the parties that prove the landlord had given consent for the tenant to go back to the property when the flooding subsided to collect these items.

I am satisfied the tenancy ended on 7 October 2022 and that the tenant went back to the property, by agreement after that date, to collect his belongings from the lower paddock. He did not owe rent beyond 7 October 2022 as he did not retain a key to the house and only accessed the property to collect his belongings as soon after the flooding as he could. The tenant confirmed some of his belongings, such as a beehive, was not removed until after the new owner took possession of the property. That was because the lower paddock had remained so flooded that the tenant finally sought permission from a neighbour to access that paddock from the neighbour’s property.

The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.

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 tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.

The landlord says the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, did not mow the lawn and did not remove all rubbish. Further the landlord says he had to replace 12 light bulbs.

The landlord did not provide entry and exit property inspection reports and photographs to support his claims.

The tenant provided evidence that at the start of the tenancy the lawn around the house was mown but the rest of the 4.5 hectares had not been mown and were waste high. He also produced evidence that he had mown all the lawn just prior to the end of his tenancy.

Further, the tenant highlighted to me that the photographs the landlord took of the lawns was from 8 weeks after the tenant had moved out. He had also established the landlord was aware the ground had been severely flooded, was unable to be mown and the weather conditions had promoted grass growth.

I do not accept the tenant is liable for $2,500.00 claimed by the landlord for having the 4.5 hectares mown 8 weeks after the tenant had moved out and post severe flooding. The landlord’s claim is dismissed for lack of evidence to support the claim. The tenant has disproven liability for this cost.

There was also a dispute between the parties about the rubbish the previous tenant had left behind. The tenant stated the rubbish in the landlord’s photographs belonged to the previous tenant and that he had paid to remove some of the previous tenant’s rubbish but there was more under the house and from inside the sheds that the tenant could not fit in the skip bin he hired to remove his own rubbish.

The landlord was unable to prove the sheds and under the house were free from rubbish at the beginning of the tenancy and so has been unable to prove, on the balance of probabilities the rubbish he complained of belonged to the tenant. I dismiss this claim for $500.00 rubbish removal for lack of evidence to support the claim. The tenant has disproven liability for this cost.

The tenant accepted the landlord’s claim for $28.00 for 12 light bulbs. The landlord has provided a receipt to support this claim. The amount ordered is proved. Reimbursement of filing fee

Section 102(4) of the RTA provides that the Tribunal may reimburse the filing fee to an applicant that has been wholly or substantially successful in its claims.

Because Roger Su has substantially succeeded with his claim, I have reimbursed the filing fee. Name suppression

The tenant applied for non-publication of his name and identifying details. He was substantially successful in his application 4708470 and was granted name suppression. He has sought name suppression for application 4855668 today. I have granted him name suppression in relation to application 4855668 heard today as the tenant has been substantially successful in defending the landlord’s claims, and I do not consider that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the tenant’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.

Non-publication of the tenant’s name and identifying details is ordered.

The landlord did not apply for name suppression in relation to either of the applications.

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4855668 — net $19,286.32 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears (26/09/22 to 07/10/2022	$1,285.68		Rent arrears (26/09/22 to 07/10/2022
Light bulbs/batteries	$28.00		Light bulbs/batteries
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44		Filing fee reimbursement
Previous order application 4708470 dated 25/04/2024		$20,620.44	Previous order application 4708470 dated 25/04/2024
Total award	$1,334.12	$20,620.44
Net award		$19,286.32
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant		$19,286.32