What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4885403?

The tribunal order states: Kelvin Logan is to pay Quality Rental Management Limited As Agent For

How much money was awarded in case 4885403?

Cleaning: $120.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $400.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4885403?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4885403?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10702715-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4885403?

The tribunal order states: Kelvin Logan is to pay Quality Rental Management Limited As Agent For

How much money was awarded in case 4885403?

Cleaning: $120.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $400.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4885403?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4885403?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10702715-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

19P Charlemont Street, Whitiora, Hamilton 3200 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4885403 — Property damage

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4885403 — net $540.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Carpet Cleaning	$120.00	Carpet Cleaning
Insurance excess - carpet replacement	$400.00	Insurance excess - carpet replacement
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$540.44
Bond	$1,180.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$540.44

Order

Kelvin Logan is to pay Quality Rental Management Limited As Agent For Hamilton Central Baptist Church $540.44 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,180.00 (6514635-013) immediately apportioned as follows: Quality Rental Management Limited As Agent For Hamilton Central Baptist Church: $540.44 Kelvin Logan: $639.56

Reasons

Ms Harrison and Ms Masters attended the teleconference hearing on behalf of the landlord. The phone number for the tenant, Mr Logan, the last three digits being 824, was called twice. Both calls went to voicemail. As the tenant was served, the hearing proceeded in his absence.
The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following 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 landlord said the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, as he left two large stains in the living room carpet. The landlord provided photographs of the two stains in the living room carpet before and after carpet cleaning treatment. The landlord said the stains in the carpet could not be removed by treating them. They provided an invoice confirming that they paid $120.00 to have the carpet cleaned to attempt to remove the stains. I find this to be a reasonable amount for attempting to remove the stains, given the evidence. Therefore, I award the landlord $120.00 for cleaning the carpet to attempt to remove the stains.
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 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 said that the tenant caused damage to the living room carpet during the tenancy by causing two large stains in the living room carpet, which could not be removed even with professional cleaning treatment.
The landlord believed the large stains were likely caused by the tenant spilling coffee on the carpet. From the photographs of the two stains before and after treatment, it is clear the stains were not removed by the cleaning treatment. I find this to likely be careless damage on the part of the tenant. As such, the tenant is liable for the replacement cost, bearing in mind depreciation and the cap in section 49B RTA.
The landlord provided a quote for replacement of the living room carpet at a cost of $1,288.47. They provided further a copy of the ingoing inspection report indicating the carpet in the property was brand new at the time the tenant entered the property. Thus, the carpet was only about 5 months old when the tenant left the property.
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.
Current depreciation guidelines estimate that the life of a carpet in a rental property is around 10 years. As such, I deduct the $1,288.47 quoted replacement cost of the carpet by 4% for depreciation to what would have been $1,236.94. However, as the landlord is claiming the insurance excess of $400.00 for the damaged carpet, I award the landlord the insurance excess of $400.00, as it is the lesser of the insurance excess and the depreciated cost of replacing the carpet.
The amounts ordered are proved. Refund of the bond
Kelvin Logan is to pay Quality Rental Management Limited As Agent For Hamilton Central Baptist Church $540.44 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,180.00 (6514635-013) immediately apportioned as follows: Quality Rental Management Limited As Agent For Hamilton Central Baptist Church: $540.44 Kelvin Logan: $639.56 Filing fee
Because Quality Rental Management Limited As Agent For Hamilton Central Baptist Church has been successful with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4885403 — net $540.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Carpet Cleaning	$120.00	Carpet Cleaning
Insurance excess - carpet replacement	$400.00	Insurance excess - carpet replacement
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$540.44
Bond	$1,180.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$540.44

Order

Kelvin Logan is to pay Quality Rental Management Limited As Agent For Hamilton Central Baptist Church $540.44 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,180.00 (6514635-013) immediately apportioned as follows: Quality Rental Management Limited As Agent For Hamilton Central Baptist Church: $540.44 Kelvin Logan: $639.56

Reasons

Ms Harrison and Ms Masters attended the teleconference hearing on behalf of the landlord. The phone number for the tenant, Mr Logan, the last three digits being 824, was called twice. Both calls went to voicemail. As the tenant was served, the hearing proceeded in his absence.
The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following 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 landlord said the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, as he left two large stains in the living room carpet. The landlord provided photographs of the two stains in the living room carpet before and after carpet cleaning treatment. The landlord said the stains in the carpet could not be removed by treating them. They provided an invoice confirming that they paid $120.00 to have the carpet cleaned to attempt to remove the stains. I find this to be a reasonable amount for attempting to remove the stains, given the evidence. Therefore, I award the landlord $120.00 for cleaning the carpet to attempt to remove the stains.
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 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 said that the tenant caused damage to the living room carpet during the tenancy by causing two large stains in the living room carpet, which could not be removed even with professional cleaning treatment.
The landlord believed the large stains were likely caused by the tenant spilling coffee on the carpet. From the photographs of the two stains before and after treatment, it is clear the stains were not removed by the cleaning treatment. I find this to likely be careless damage on the part of the tenant. As such, the tenant is liable for the replacement cost, bearing in mind depreciation and the cap in section 49B RTA.
The landlord provided a quote for replacement of the living room carpet at a cost of $1,288.47. They provided further a copy of the ingoing inspection report indicating the carpet in the property was brand new at the time the tenant entered the property. Thus, the carpet was only about 5 months old when the tenant left the property.
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.
Current depreciation guidelines estimate that the life of a carpet in a rental property is around 10 years. As such, I deduct the $1,288.47 quoted replacement cost of the carpet by 4% for depreciation to what would have been $1,236.94. However, as the landlord is claiming the insurance excess of $400.00 for the damaged carpet, I award the landlord the insurance excess of $400.00, as it is the lesser of the insurance excess and the depreciated cost of replacing the carpet.
The amounts ordered are proved. Refund of the bond
Kelvin Logan is to pay Quality Rental Management Limited As Agent For Hamilton Central Baptist Church $540.44 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,180.00 (6514635-013) immediately apportioned as follows: Quality Rental Management Limited As Agent For Hamilton Central Baptist Church: $540.44 Kelvin Logan: $639.56 Filing fee
Because Quality Rental Management Limited As Agent For Hamilton Central Baptist Church has been successful with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4885403 — Property damage at 19P Charlemont Street, Whitiora, Hamilton 3200

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4885403 — Property damage at 19P Charlemont Street, Whitiora, Hamilton 3200

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

Property management

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions