What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4867120 about?

The tribunal order states: Hasibullah Nabawi must pay [The landlord] $1,170.44 immediately, calculated

How much money was awarded in case 4867120?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,150.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4867120?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4867120?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10569166-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4867120 about?

The tribunal order states: Hasibullah Nabawi must pay [The landlord] $1,170.44 immediately, calculated

How much money was awarded in case 4867120?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,150.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4867120?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4867120?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10569166-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4867120 — Property damage

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4867120 — net $1,170.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Repairs to waste management system from 31/12/23 to 04/01/24	$1,150.00	Repairs to waste management system from 31/12/23 to 04/01/24
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,170.44
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,170.44

Both parties attended the hearing.

The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

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 careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.

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. The waste management system was blocked with condoms, wipes and other non-disposable waste items on 30 December 2022, which resulted in Ecoflow having to make an emergency call out to the premise and subsequently referred the landlord to other companies to clean the pump chamber out, clean the pipe out and reconnect the pipe. Ecoflow then rechecked the system after the repairs and rest the system.

The tenant says his flatmates caused the blockage but accepted he is responsible for any damage they cause to the property as the only name tenant on the tenancy agreement. He refutes that he should be liable for anything more than the pump chamber being sucked out.

I find the $1,150.00 costs claimed were incurred by the landlord as a result of the tenant and/or his flatmates breaching clause 10 of the tenancy agreement by putting prohibited items into the waste management system. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The amounts ordered are proved as follows: a. $667.00 for Burnetts Tank sucking out the pump chamber; b. $253.00 for Drain Patrol Ltd sucking out the pipes and reconnecting the pipe; and c. $230.00 for Ecoflow being called out to check the system on 31 December 2023 and to recheck and reset the system on 4 January 2024. Reimbursement of the filing fee

Because [the applicant] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee. Name suppression

The landlord applies for non-publication of her name and identifying details.

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 in her proceedings. I do not consider publication is in the public interest or justified because of the landlord’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.

Non-publication is ordered.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4867120 — net $1,170.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Repairs to waste management system from 31/12/23 to 04/01/24	$1,150.00	Repairs to waste management system from 31/12/23 to 04/01/24
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,170.44
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,170.44

Order

Hasibullah Nabawi must pay [The landlord] $1,170.44 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

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 careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.
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. The waste management system was blocked with condoms, wipes and other non-disposable waste items on 30 December 2022, which resulted in Ecoflow having to make an emergency call out to the premise and subsequently referred the landlord to other companies to clean the pump chamber out, clean the pipe out and reconnect the pipe. Ecoflow then rechecked the system after the repairs and rest the system.
The tenant says his flatmates caused the blockage but accepted he is responsible for any damage they cause to the property as the only name tenant on the tenancy agreement. He refutes that he should be liable for anything more than the pump chamber being sucked out.
I find the $1,150.00 costs claimed were incurred by the landlord as a result of the tenant and/or his flatmates breaching clause 10 of the tenancy agreement by putting prohibited items into the waste management system. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved as follows: a. $667.00 for Burnetts Tank sucking out the pump chamber; b. $253.00 for Drain Patrol Ltd sucking out the pipes and reconnecting the pipe; and c. $230.00 for Ecoflow being called out to check the system on 31 December 2023 and to recheck and reset the system on 4 January 2024. Reimbursement of the filing fee
Because [the applicant] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee. Name suppression
The landlord applies for non-publication of her name and identifying details.
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 in her proceedings. I do not consider publication is in the public interest or justified because of the landlord’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
Non-publication is ordered.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4867120 — Property damage

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4867120 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions