What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4879025 about?

The tribunal order states: Kayla Hemopo is the pay the sum of $200.44 to Topstar Property Management

How much money was awarded in case 4879025?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Fix broken doors, shower, and holes…: $2,700.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4879025?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4879025?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10875828-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4879025 about?

The tribunal order states: Kayla Hemopo is the pay the sum of $200.44 to Topstar Property Management

How much money was awarded in case 4879025?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Fix broken doors, shower, and holes…: $2,700.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4879025?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4879025?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10875828-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit/Flat 6, 79D Favona Road, Favona, Auckland 2024 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4879025 — Property damage

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4879025 — net $200.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Repairs: Fix broken doors, shower, and holes in the walls	$2,700.00	Repairs: Fix broken doors, shower, and holes in the walls
Net award	$200.44
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$200.44

Kayla Hemopo is the pay the sum of $200.44 to Topstar Property Management Limited immediately for repairs and reimbursement of the filing fee, as calculated and set out below: DescriptionLandlord Filing fee reimbursement$20.44 Repairs: Fix broken doors, shower, and holes in the walls$2,700.00 Total award$2,720.44 Minus Bond-$2,520.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$200.44

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,520.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing, the tenant did not attend. The tenant was served with the notice of hearing. I am proceeding with the hearing in her absence.

The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the tenant’s obligations, compensation for damages, reimbursement of filing fee and refund of the bond.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

The Tribunal may terminate a tenancy for breach where, due to the nature or extent of the breach, it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate. See section 56(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Where the breach is not capable of remedy, the landlord is not expressly required to serve a 14-day breach notice on the tenant. A breach is not capable to remedy where the thing done, or its effect, cannot be undone.

However, unless the breach is serious, the Tribunal usually requires the landlord to have warned the tenant about the likely consequences of continued breach before it will exercise its discretion to terminate.

The tenant has breached their obligations under the Tenancy Agreement and the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, by keeping a dog at the premises and causing damage to the property.

The breach is not capable of remedy because the landlord has served the tenant with four separate 14-day notices to remedy the breaches. On 10 October 2023 the landlord served a notice for keeping the dog and for the damages to the shower, doors, and walls. The landlord sent a quote to the tenant for the repairs to the property. The dog remained at the property; the damage was not repaired by the tenant.

On 10 May 2024 the landlord sent a further two 14-day notices for keeping the same dog at the property and more damages.

The tenant did not remove the dog nor attend to the damages at the property.

The landlord has been able to confirm that the dog is still on the property as of today’s hearing. There has been evidence produced of the dog attacking a tenant at a neighbouring property four times in the recent past. This neighbour lives in fear and carries sticks to defend himself from further attacks from the dog when he leaves his house.

This was a brand-new property when this tenancy began. In two years, the carpet throughout the house is smelling and heavily stains with dog urine. There are multiple holes punched in the walls and doors at the property. One of the shower doors has been removed from the bathroom.

It would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy. The tenant has shown that she will not comply with her obligations under the Tenancy Agreement and the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 by removing the dog and not damaging the property.

The tenancy is terminated on Friday 4 th October 2024 at 11.59pm. The landlord is to be given possession of the property after that date and time. Damages:

The landlord has provided the Tribunal with quotes for $2700.00 for the damage and photos of the damage to walls, doors, carpet, and shower.

The damage is extensive, and the property cannot be re-rented until the property has been repaired. Given this I am awarding the quotation of $2700.00 for the work to be carried out on the property immediately after the termination on 4 th October 2024.

The bond is to be refunded to the landlord immediately from the bond centre to offset the debt owed to the landlord by the tenant.

The landlord has applied for suppression of their name and details. As they have been successful with their application, I am granting suppression.

Because [The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4879025 — net $200.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Repairs: Fix broken doors, shower, and holes in the walls	$2,700.00	Repairs: Fix broken doors, shower, and holes in the walls
Net award	$200.44
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$200.44

Order

Kayla Hemopo is the pay the sum of $200.44 to Topstar Property Management Limited immediately for repairs and reimbursement of the filing fee, as calculated and set out below: DescriptionLandlord Filing fee reimbursement$20.44 Repairs: Fix broken doors, shower, and holes in the walls$2,700.00 Total award$2,720.44 Minus Bond-$2,520.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$200.44
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,520.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing, the tenant did not attend. The tenant was served with the notice of hearing. I am proceeding with the hearing in her absence.
The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the tenant’s obligations, compensation for damages, reimbursement of filing fee and refund of the bond.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

The Tribunal may terminate a tenancy for breach where, due to the nature or extent of the breach, it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate. See section 56(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Where the breach is not capable of remedy, the landlord is not expressly required to serve a 14-day breach notice on the tenant. A breach is not capable to remedy where the thing done, or its effect, cannot be undone.
However, unless the breach is serious, the Tribunal usually requires the landlord to have warned the tenant about the likely consequences of continued breach before it will exercise its discretion to terminate.
The tenant has breached their obligations under the Tenancy Agreement and the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, by keeping a dog at the premises and causing damage to the property.
The breach is not capable of remedy because the landlord has served the tenant with four separate 14-day notices to remedy the breaches. On 10 October 2023 the landlord served a notice for keeping the dog and for the damages to the shower, doors, and walls. The landlord sent a quote to the tenant for the repairs to the property. The dog remained at the property; the damage was not repaired by the tenant.
On 10 May 2024 the landlord sent a further two 14-day notices for keeping the same dog at the property and more damages.
The tenant did not remove the dog nor attend to the damages at the property.
The landlord has been able to confirm that the dog is still on the property as of today’s hearing. There has been evidence produced of the dog attacking a tenant at a neighbouring property four times in the recent past. This neighbour lives in fear and carries sticks to defend himself from further attacks from the dog when he leaves his house.
This was a brand-new property when this tenancy began. In two years, the carpet throughout the house is smelling and heavily stains with dog urine. There are multiple holes punched in the walls and doors at the property. One of the shower doors has been removed from the bathroom.
It would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy. The tenant has shown that she will not comply with her obligations under the Tenancy Agreement and the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 by removing the dog and not damaging the property.
The tenancy is terminated on Friday 4 th October 2024 at 11.59pm. The landlord is to be given possession of the property after that date and time. Damages:
The landlord has provided the Tribunal with quotes for $2700.00 for the damage and photos of the damage to walls, doors, carpet, and shower.
The damage is extensive, and the property cannot be re-rented until the property has been repaired. Given this I am awarding the quotation of $2700.00 for the work to be carried out on the property immediately after the termination on 4 th October 2024.
The bond is to be refunded to the landlord immediately from the bond centre to offset the debt owed to the landlord by the tenant.
The landlord has applied for suppression of their name and details. As they have been successful with their application, I am granting suppression.
Because [The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4879025 — Property damage at Unit/Flat 6, 79D Favona Road, Favona, Auckland 2024

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4879025 — Property damage at Unit/Flat 6, 79D Favona Road, Favona, Auckland 2024

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions