What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4864580 about?

The tribunal order states: Felicia Erin Maniapoto must pay [The landlord/s] $8,746.18 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 4864580?

Cleaning: $400.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $462.86 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $132.82 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $5,907.20 awarded to landlord; 3 Doors: $652.24 awarded to landlord; 3 Walls: $600.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $600.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,245.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4864580?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4864580?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10663366-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4864580 about?

The tribunal order states: Felicia Erin Maniapoto must pay [The landlord/s] $8,746.18 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 4864580?

Cleaning: $400.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $462.86 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $132.82 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $5,907.20 awarded to landlord; 3 Doors: $652.24 awarded to landlord; 3 Walls: $600.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $600.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,245.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4864580?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4864580?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10663366-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

27 May Street, Hamilton East, Hamilton 3216 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4864580 — Rent arrears

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4864580 — net $7,420.56 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 29 February 2024	$5,907.20	Rent arrears to 29 February 2024
Rubbish removal: skip bin hire	$1,245.00	Rubbish removal: skip bin hire
Rubbish removal: labour	$600.00	Rubbish removal: labour
Cleaning: inside	$400.00	Cleaning: inside
Cleaning: outside	$200.00	Cleaning: outside
Repairs: 3 doors	$652.24	Repairs: 3 doors
Repairs: 3 walls	$600.00	Repairs: 3 walls
Window repairs	$462.86	Window repairs
Carpet damage	$132.82	Carpet damage
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$7,420.56
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$7,420.56

The landlord attended the hearing by telephone. The tenant had indicated that they wished to attend by phone and were asked to provide a current phone number. The tenant did not update their phone number and when the Tribunal tried to contact the tenant, the phone was disconnected. The hearing continued in their absence.

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

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 29 February 2024, after the tenant told the landlord that she was leaving the premises and asked the landlord for help getting a skip bin. The tenant did not give notice to end the periodic tenancy and the landlord claimed rent in lieu of the 28 days’ notice required.

Tenants can be found liable for up to 28 days when they abandon the premises. See section 61(3)(b) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

I don’t find that the tenant has abandoned the premises. There was no claim for abandonment made. The tenant may have been in breach of the notice provisions, but this does not mean the premises are abandoned. Rent arrears are awarded to 29 February 2024. Rent records which prove the amount owing to that date were provided.

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 did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. The premises were a large 3-bedroom house, and the evidence showed an untidy property with a lot of belongings left behind.

There was not enough evidence provided to justify the large cleaning bill claimed. This amount awarded reflects this.

The tenant left a lot of furniture behind including mattresses, fridge freezers, tables side drawers’ clothes toys stainless steel recycling and lounge furniture.

The amount claimed for skip bin hire is awarded and due to lack of evidence the amount awarded costs for labour to fill the bins is less than was claimed.

There was little evidence that the outside required a lot of cleaning after all the rubbish had been removed. There was an entry area that needed some work and again the amount awarded reflects the evidence provided.

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. Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. See section 49B(3A)(a) RTA.

Tenants are liable for the cost of repairing damage that is intentional or which results from any activity at the premises that is an imprisonable offence. This applies to anything the tenant does and anything done by a person they are responsible for. See section 49B(1) 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 following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. A window was broken. Photographs of the damage and an invoice were provided. b. Three doors were damaged. c. Two holes in a bedroom wall, two holes in the lounge wall and a large hole inside a wardrobe. d. An area of carpet was badly marked. Two areas were claimed but only evidence for one area was provided.

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

An account was provided for wall repairs and the award is made based on the evidence of the damaged areas provided by the landlord. 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] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Section 95A RTA states regarding suppression orders that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.

The landlord has substantially succeeded, and name suppression is granted.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4864580 — net $7,420.56 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 29 February 2024	$5,907.20	Rent arrears to 29 February 2024
Rubbish removal: skip bin hire	$1,245.00	Rubbish removal: skip bin hire
Rubbish removal: labour	$600.00	Rubbish removal: labour
Cleaning: inside	$400.00	Cleaning: inside
Cleaning: outside	$200.00	Cleaning: outside
Repairs: 3 doors	$652.24	Repairs: 3 doors
Repairs: 3 walls	$600.00	Repairs: 3 walls
Window repairs	$462.86	Window repairs
Carpet damage	$132.82	Carpet damage
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$7,420.56
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$7,420.56

Order

Felicia Erin Maniapoto must pay [The landlord/s] $8,746.18 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,800.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.
All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing by telephone. The tenant had indicated that they wished to attend by phone and were asked to provide a current phone number. The tenant did not update their phone number and when the Tribunal tried to contact the tenant, the phone was disconnected. The hearing continued in their absence.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 29 February 2024, after the tenant told the landlord that she was leaving the premises and asked the landlord for help getting a skip bin. The tenant did not give notice to end the periodic tenancy and the landlord claimed rent in lieu of the 28 days’ notice required.
Tenants can be found liable for up to 28 days when they abandon the premises. See section 61(3)(b) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
I don’t find that the tenant has abandoned the premises. There was no claim for abandonment made. The tenant may have been in breach of the notice provisions, but this does not mean the premises are abandoned. Rent arrears are awarded to 29 February 2024. Rent records which prove the amount owing to that date were provided.

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 did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. The premises were a large 3-bedroom house, and the evidence showed an untidy property with a lot of belongings left behind.
There was not enough evidence provided to justify the large cleaning bill claimed. This amount awarded reflects this.
The tenant left a lot of furniture behind including mattresses, fridge freezers, tables side drawers’ clothes toys stainless steel recycling and lounge furniture.
The amount claimed for skip bin hire is awarded and due to lack of evidence the amount awarded costs for labour to fill the bins is less than was claimed.
There was little evidence that the outside required a lot of cleaning after all the rubbish had been removed. There was an entry area that needed some work and again the amount awarded reflects the evidence provided.
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. Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. See section 49B(3A)(a) RTA.
Tenants are liable for the cost of repairing damage that is intentional or which results from any activity at the premises that is an imprisonable offence. This applies to anything the tenant does and anything done by a person they are responsible for. See section 49B(1) 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 following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. A window was broken. Photographs of the damage and an invoice were provided. b. Three doors were damaged. c. Two holes in a bedroom wall, two holes in the lounge wall and a large hole inside a wardrobe. d. An area of carpet was badly marked. Two areas were claimed but only evidence for one area was provided.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
An account was provided for wall repairs and the award is made based on the evidence of the damaged areas provided by the landlord. 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] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.
Section 95A RTA states regarding suppression orders that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
The landlord has substantially succeeded, and name suppression is granted.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4864580 — Rent arrears at 27 May Street, Hamilton East, Hamilton 3216

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4864580 — Rent arrears at 27 May Street, Hamilton East, Hamilton 3216

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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