What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4857820 about?

The tribunal order states: Juanita Rosemary Flavell must pay [The landlord/s] $4,739.27 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 4857820?

Cleaning: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $250.00 awarded to landlord; Lightbulbs: $275.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $550.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $287.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $429.81 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $550.00 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: Curtains in lou…: $460.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,500.00 awarded to landlord; Smoke Alarms: $57.50 awarded to landlord; Toilet Seat: $253.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4857820?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4857820?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10808397-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4857820 about?

The tribunal order states: Juanita Rosemary Flavell must pay [The landlord/s] $4,739.27 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 4857820?

Cleaning: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $250.00 awarded to landlord; Lightbulbs: $275.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $550.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $287.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $429.81 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $550.00 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: Curtains in lou…: $460.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,500.00 awarded to landlord; Smoke Alarms: $57.50 awarded to landlord; Toilet Seat: $253.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4857820?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4857820?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10808397-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

162A Elliot Street, Pahurehure, Papakura 2113 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4857820 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4857820 — net $4,739.27 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning	$1,000.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal: Interior and exterior	$1,500.00	Rubbish removal: Interior and exterior
Light bulbs/batteries: Includes battery for AC	$275.00	Light bulbs/batteries: Includes battery for AC
Lawns and Garden work	$250.00	Lawns and Garden work
Replace furnishings: Curtains in lounge	$460.00	Replace furnishings: Curtains in lounge
Toilet seat	$253.00	Toilet seat
Smoke alarm replacement and installation	$57.50	Smoke alarm replacement and installation
Repairs: Insurance excess for leaks	$550.00	Repairs: Insurance excess for leaks
Insurance excess carpet	$550.00	Insurance excess carpet
Repairs to door	$287.50	Repairs to door
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Lock/key replacement	$429.81	Lock/key replacement
Net award	$4,739.27
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,739.27

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not attend the hearing or seek an adjournment. Therefore, the Tribunal can proceed to hear the matter in the absence of the tenant.

The landlord has applied for compensation for cleaning, rubbish removal, replacement items, damage to the property and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

The tenancy ended on 28 February by eviction, following the breach of the conditional termination order of the Tribunal [TT4776997].

The landlord has received the bond and applied it towards rent owing and the water arrears owing, leaving a balance of $893.98 to the tenant’s credit.

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 tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish.

The landlord provided inspection reports completed on the 11 March 2024. This was after the landlord gave the tenant time to go into the property to collect belongings. The tenant did not remove all the furniture and a considerable amount of belongings and rubbish were left at the property which had to be disposed of.

The tenant did not clean the property. The inspection photographs show a very messy and dirty property. The oven is very dirty and would have taken considerable time to bring it to a reasonable condition.

The landlord’s cleaners invoice records that a deep clean of the property was done and the landlord is seeking reimbursement of the cleaner’s fee of $1480 plus GST. The Tribunal sees claims for cleaning on a daily basis and this amount is excessive to bring the property up to a reasonable standard. I appreciate that the landlord would have wanted to take the opportunity of having the property deep cleaned to make it more attractive to new tenants, but the Tribunal is only able to award compensation to remedy the breach. This means that the Tribunal must only award compensation necessary to clean the property to a reasonable standard. The amount awarded reflects the amount that I consider appropriate to award to bring it to that standard.

The tenant had not mowed the lawns for a long period. The landlord addressed this breach with the tenant a month before she moved out. The lawns are very overgrown and the amount awarded reflects the time that would have been needed to return the lawns and garden to a reasonable state.

The tenant did not return the keys.

The landlord had to replace 16 light bulbs and smoke alarm and air conditioner batteries.

The amounts ordered are proved.

Is the tenant 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 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.

Tenants are liable for the cost of repairing damage that is intentional. 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 tenant is responsible for any damage caused by any person that they have invited into their home, or children that are living at the home. See section 49B(1) RTA.

I am satisfied that the following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. Staining on carpets throughout the house. There are red stains on the carpets in the bedroom and a stain in the living room as well. Those stains are not in the photographs in the ingoing inspection report. The landlord has successfully claimed insurance and seeks the insurance excess of $550.00. I am satisfied that the amount should be awarded. It is less than the value of the carpet, even taking into account depreciation. b. Damage to the walls (including paint damage) as a result of the leak. When the tenant left the landlord found a leak on the laundry door. The cause of the leak appears from the leaking washing machine, which then ran across the floor to the opposite wall. There was a gap in the wall where the water permeated causing damage. The landlord’s tradesperson records that the damage has been partially caused by a lack of silicon in the area. I am satisfied that the tenants washing machine or the connection between the taps and the tenants washing machine was leaking because the landlord told me that she discovered water from the washing machine at the exit inspection, and the photographs show discolouration on the tiled floor where the washing machine has leaked. The landlord says that it has successfully claimed insurance for this issue. I consider this damage to be careless damage and therefore the tenant is only liable for the insurance excess of $550.00. As the painting of the garage walls etc are as result of the leak then I have not awarded any separate compensation for those amounts. c. Damage to the ensuite door. There is a hole in the door. d. Broken toilet seat. e. Damage to blinds in the lounge- the cords are ripped away making them unusable.

The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The amounts ordered are proved.

I have taken into account betterment and depreciation. The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached their obligations, and should not be better or worse off. In calculating depreciation, I have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.

Because [The applicant/s] landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee and granted name suppression as requested.

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4857820 — net $4,739.27 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning	$1,000.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal: Interior and exterior	$1,500.00	Rubbish removal: Interior and exterior
Light bulbs/batteries: Includes battery for AC	$275.00	Light bulbs/batteries: Includes battery for AC
Lawns and Garden work	$250.00	Lawns and Garden work
Replace furnishings: Curtains in lounge	$460.00	Replace furnishings: Curtains in lounge
Toilet seat	$253.00	Toilet seat
Smoke alarm replacement and installation	$57.50	Smoke alarm replacement and installation
Repairs: Insurance excess for leaks	$550.00	Repairs: Insurance excess for leaks
Insurance excess carpet	$550.00	Insurance excess carpet
Repairs to door	$287.50	Repairs to door
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Lock/key replacement	$429.81	Lock/key replacement
Net award	$4,739.27
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,739.27

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not attend the hearing or seek an adjournment. Therefore, the Tribunal can proceed to hear the matter in the absence of the tenant.

The landlord has applied for compensation for cleaning, rubbish removal, replacement items, damage to the property and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

The tenancy ended on 28 February by eviction, following the breach of the conditional termination order of the Tribunal [TT4776997].

The landlord has received the bond and applied it towards rent owing and the water arrears owing, leaving a balance of $893.98 to the tenant’s credit.

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

The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish.

The tenant did not return the keys.

The landlord had to replace 16 light bulbs and smoke alarm and air conditioner batteries.

The amounts ordered are proved.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

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.

The tenant is responsible for any damage caused by any person that they have invited into their home, or children that are living at the home. See section 49B(1) RTA.

The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The amounts ordered are proved.

Because [The applicant/s] landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee and granted name suppression as requested.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4857820 — Property damage at 162A Elliot Street, Pahurehure, Papakura 2113

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4857820 — Property damage at 162A Elliot Street, Pahurehure, Papakura 2113

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions