How much money was awarded in case 4857221?

Cleaning: $556.25 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $450.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $450.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4857221?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4857221?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10512616-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 4857221?

Cleaning: $556.25 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $450.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $450.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4857221?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4857221?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10512616-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4857221 — Property damage

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4857221 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 4857221 — net $1,456.25 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Repair bedroom wall (accepted	$450.00	Repair bedroom wall (accepted
Repair hallway wall	$450.00	Repair hallway wall
Cleaning (reduced	$556.25	Cleaning (reduced
Net award	$1,456.25
Bond	$4,400.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,456.25

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the names and identifying details of both parties.

The tenant/s to pay the landlord/s $1,456.25 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $4,400.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: [The landlord/s]: $1,456.25 [The tenant/s]: $2,943.75

The landlord’s applications for gardening costs, garden waste removal, spray products, weed spraying and the cost of replacing a cat door are dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

The landlord has applied for compensation, part refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Background

The tenancy started on 30 January 2023 and was for a one-year fixed term. The tenants vacated the premises on 20 February 2024.

After the tenancy ended, the landlord applied for costs from the bond. The tenants filed a cross application seeking a refund of their bond.

The bond belongs to the tenants in law until a landlord proves a claim against it. The landlord’s claims

The landlord has claimed for repairs to 2 walls, cleaning costs, gardening costs (the landlord’s labour and travel costs), weed spray, garden waste removal and the replacement cost of a cat flap. The damage claims

The tenants accepted the landlord’s claim for damage to a bedroom wall. They accepted that damage to a hallway wall was careless damage but queried the repair cost.

I allow both claims, one by consent, the other on the basis that the tenants accept the damage was caused carelessly, and the landlord has incurred the cost to fix it. Cleaning costs

At the end of a 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 (RTA).

Whether premises are left reasonably clean is not based on the subjective opinion of either party, but on the Tribunal’s objective assessment of the evidence.

Both parties provided photos in evidence and gave oral evidence.

The invoice for cleaning includes the cleaning of the exterior windows. That is not a tenant responsibility. I have deducted that component from the invoice for cleaning.

I find that some cleaning, beyond that done by the tenants, was reasonably required. I allow the remaining cost of the cleaning invoice claimed. When a tenant fails to comply with their statutory responsibilities, the landlord can have the work done and charge for it. The claimed cost in this case is not excessive for the cleaning that was required. Gardening and other claimed costs

I dismiss the landlord’s claims for gardening work including labour, travel and materials (spray products) and waste removal.

The landlord considers that the tenants did not leave the gardens in the same state as they were at the start of the tenancy.

That is not the statutory test. A tenant does not have to return the premises (including the gardens) in the state provided at the start of the tenancy, only in a reasonably tidy condition.

The landlord has professional experience and expertise as a gardener. Possibly the landlord’s expectations are higher than the law requires. Here, the tenants engaged [mowing company] to undertake a general tidy up of the gardens. They spent $1,100.00. That is not the action of neglectful tenants.

Landlords must expect to have to do some gardening and cleaning work at the end of a tenancy.

I find that the tenants met their statutory responsibility in this case.

The landlord has claimed for the replacement cost of a cat flap. The cat flap was located in [The tenant/s] bedroom.

The tenants gave evidence that the cat flap was locked from the inside so cats could not gain access from the outside. They said nothing could break the flap from within. They said that a neighbour’s cat would often try to get in (photo produced). For 2 months before the end of the tenancy the room was vacant, and the cat flap was locked.

The landlord has not proved that the tenants caused careless damage to the cat flap. Equally, the flap might have been damaged by a cat outside trying to force its way in. The flap has not been replaced. The landlord’s claim is based solely on a quote for the replacement. I dismiss this claim. Result

The landlord’s claims are allowed in the amount of $1,456.25 for the repair of damage and for cleaning (excluding the exterior windows).

The remainder of the landlord’s claims are dismissed.

I make no order reimbursing the filing fee.

The bond will be split between the parties - $1,456.25 to the landlord and $2,943.75 to the tenants. Name suppression

Both parties applied for a name suppression order. I suppress both parties’ names as each party has succeeded to a degree that would allow name suppression, the landlord in establishing some of her claims and the tenants in defending some of the claims.

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4857221 — net $1,456.25 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Repair bedroom wall (accepted	$450.00	Repair bedroom wall (accepted
Repair hallway wall	$450.00	Repair hallway wall
Cleaning (reduced	$556.25	Cleaning (reduced
Net award	$1,456.25
Bond	$4,400.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,456.25