How much money was awarded in case 4868500?

Cleaning: $210.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,100.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4868500?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4868500?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10657412-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 4868500?

Cleaning: $210.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,100.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4868500?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4868500?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10657412-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

11 Dobson Street, Spreydon, Christchurch 8024 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4868500 — Property damage

Q: What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4868500?

The tribunal order states: Jackson Lewis must pay Vision Property Management Limited T/A Harcourts As

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4868500 — net $150.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$500.00	Rent arrears
Carpet Cleaning	$210.00	Carpet Cleaning
Repairs: Carpet Insurance excess x2	$1,100.00	Repairs: Carpet Insurance excess x2
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$150.44
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$150.44

Jackson Lewis must pay Vision Property Management Limited T/A Harcourts As Agent For Amitrajit & Bhaswati Sarkar (Jai Guru Ltd) $150.44 immediately, calculated as shown in table below. DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears$500.00 Carpet Cleaning$210.00 Repairs: Carpet Insurance excess x2$1,100.00 Filing fee reimbursement$20.44 Total award$1,830.44 Bond$1,680.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$150.44

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,680.00 (5957612-003) to Vision Property Management Limited T/A Harcourts As Agent For Amitrajit & Bhaswati Sarkar (Jai Guru Ltd) immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing.

The tenant did not attend.

The application was filed more than two months after the end of the tenancy so the usual service rules no longer apply.

The application must be served either personally on the tenant, on someone over the age of 16 living at address where the tenant now lives, or by post to an address provided by the tenant within two months before the application was made. See section 91A(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The application has not been served in accordance with these requirements.

However, the application was served on the tenant by email at the email address for service he provided in the Tenancy Agreement and which he used to communicate with the landlord. I direct that the application has been served by a by a method likely to bring it to the tenant’s notice. See section 91B Residential Tenancies Act 1986. As such, I have proceeded with 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.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 3 December 2023. 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 did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy in that areas of carpet were stained. The landlord provided ingoing and outgoing inspection reports, email correspondence with the tenant, photographs and a receipt for stain removal.

The amount ordered is 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 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 landlord claimed that carpet and benchtop damage occurred during the tenancy and was more than fair wear and tear. The landlord provided evidence of damage. It also provided an email from the tenant accepting two of three carpet excesses claimed. Those amounts are awarded.

There was no evidence that the tenant accepted the benchtop claim. Nor was there any evidence that an insurance excess was incurred or that repairs had been carried out. The landlord did not discharge the onus of proving it has suffered a loss as a result of any damage to the bench. That aspect of the claim is dismissed.

As the landlord was substantially successful, I must award reimbursement of the Tribunal application fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4868500 — net $150.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$500.00	Rent arrears
Carpet Cleaning	$210.00	Carpet Cleaning
Repairs: Carpet Insurance excess x2	$1,100.00	Repairs: Carpet Insurance excess x2
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$150.44
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$150.44

Order

Jackson Lewis must pay Vision Property Management Limited T/A Harcourts As Agent For Amitrajit & Bhaswati Sarkar (Jai Guru Ltd) $150.44 immediately, calculated as shown in table below. DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears$500.00 Carpet Cleaning$210.00 Repairs: Carpet Insurance excess x2$1,100.00 Filing fee reimbursement$20.44 Total award$1,830.44 Bond$1,680.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$150.44
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,680.00 (5957612-003) to Vision Property Management Limited T/A Harcourts As Agent For Amitrajit & Bhaswati Sarkar (Jai Guru Ltd) immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing.
The tenant did not attend.
The application was filed more than two months after the end of the tenancy so the usual service rules no longer apply.
The application must be served either personally on the tenant, on someone over the age of 16 living at address where the tenant now lives, or by post to an address provided by the tenant within two months before the application was made. See section 91A(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The application has not been served in accordance with these requirements.
However, the application was served on the tenant by email at the email address for service he provided in the Tenancy Agreement and which he used to communicate with the landlord. I direct that the application has been served by a by a method likely to bring it to the tenant’s notice. See section 91B Residential Tenancies Act 1986. As such, I have proceeded with 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.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 3 December 2023. 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 did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy in that areas of carpet were stained. The landlord provided ingoing and outgoing inspection reports, email correspondence with the tenant, photographs and a receipt for stain removal.
The amount ordered is 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 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 landlord claimed that carpet and benchtop damage occurred during the tenancy and was more than fair wear and tear. The landlord provided evidence of damage. It also provided an email from the tenant accepting two of three carpet excesses claimed. Those amounts are awarded.
There was no evidence that the tenant accepted the benchtop claim. Nor was there any evidence that an insurance excess was incurred or that repairs had been carried out. The landlord did not discharge the onus of proving it has suffered a loss as a result of any damage to the bench. That aspect of the claim is dismissed.
As the landlord was substantially successful, I must award reimbursement of the Tribunal application fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4868500 — Property damage at 11 Dobson Street, Spreydon, Christchurch 8024

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4868500 — Property damage at 11 Dobson Street, Spreydon, Christchurch 8024

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions