What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4885459 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal removes the name of the second named respondent, as the

How much money was awarded in case 4885459?

Cleaning: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Electricity: $266.41 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Mailbox Key: $11.73 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $172.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,227.53 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $3,315.00 awarded to landlord; Wardrobe Door: $250.00 awarded to landlord; Washing Machine Taps: $343.76 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $276.70 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4885459?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4885459?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10778875-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4885459 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal removes the name of the second named respondent, as the

How much money was awarded in case 4885459?

Cleaning: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Electricity: $266.41 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Mailbox Key: $11.73 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $172.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,227.53 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $3,315.00 awarded to landlord; Wardrobe Door: $250.00 awarded to landlord; Washing Machine Taps: $343.76 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $276.70 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4885459?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4885459?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10778875-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4885459 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4885459 — net $4,404.07 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 2.4.2024	$3,315.00	Rent arrears to 2.4.2024
Water rates	$276.70	Water rates
Electricity	$266.41	Electricity
Key & swipe card replacement	$172.50	Key & swipe card replacement
Mailbox key	$11.73	Mailbox key
Cleaning	$100.00	Cleaning
Wall repairs	$1,227.53	Wall repairs
Repairs: washing machine taps	$343.76	Repairs: washing machine taps
Repairs: wardrobe door	$250.00	Repairs: wardrobe door
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$4,404.07
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,404.07

Order

The Tribunal removes the name of the second named respondent, as the available evidence does not show that this person is a tenant of the premises.
Roimata Jasmine Epere must pay [The landlord/s] $4,404.07 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,580.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

Only the landlord attended the hearing. There was no appearance by the tenant. Being satisfied that the tenant had been notified, the hearing proceeded in her absence.
This tenancy began on 29 January 2022 and ended on 2 April 2024.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, outgoings, compensation, payment from the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. The hearing was adjourned part-heard so the landlord could provide additional evidence, which was not available at the time of the hearing. This has since been provided and the hearing closed on 26 August 2024.

How much is owed for rent, water and electricity?

The tenancy ended by mutual agreement on 2 April 2024. The landlord produced evidence of text messages exchanged with the tenant, establishing the ending of the tenancy.
The landlord seeks rent arrears, water and electricity charges. Rent records, water rates and electricity invoices were provided, 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) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the RTA).
The landlord claims the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy. The photographic evidence establishes part of the claim for cleaning costs, so from the amount sought of $280, based on an invoice, $100.00 is awarded. The standard to be met by the tenant is to leave the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy condition. There may be some additional cleaning that a landlord needs to do to bring the premises up to a standard acceptable for new tenants, so, on this basis, the full amount sought is not awarded.
The tenant returned one set of keys and swipe card, but the other key and swipe card were not returned. A $50.00 deposit was paid by the tenant for the second set. The landlord claims a further key and swipe card was given to the tenant and was not returned. The landlord provided an email from the apartment managers confirming that each swipe card was $50 plus GST and each key was $50 plus GST. There is also evidence of text exchanges between the landlord and tenant. I consider it reasonable for the landlord to be compensated for three missing items (3 x $50.00 plus GST), since the deposit has been retained for the fourth item. A mailbox key was also not returned and had to be replaced, at the cost of $11.73.
The amounts ordered above are proved.
The claim for the heat pump remote holder is dismissed, due to the lack of evidence of the cost to replace it. General principles regarding responsibility for damage
The landlord claims compensation for damage. To be successful, 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 of the RTA.
Where the damage is careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B of the RTA applies. 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) of the 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) of the 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) of the RTA.
In this case the landlord is not insured for tenant damage. The rent for the premises is $400.00 per week.
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) of the 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.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

From the photographic, oral, and documentary evidence produced by the landlord, I am satisfied that the following damage was caused during the tenancy: • Wall repairs: there is one large hole on the wall located on the right-hand side of the large window in the studio apartment, and there is a further hole near the wardrobe door. The repair cost, including plastering, painting and materials, is $1,227.53. The landlord states the apartment was built in 2019, with all walls being in good condition at the start of the tenancy. • Damage to the wardrobe door: the wardrobe door, with a mirror in it, was damaged and required repair. The landlord seeks $300.00 ($200.00 was originally sought). The invoice provided by the landlord includes other work, so a portion of this invoice is awarded, and $250.00 compensation is considered reasonable. • Washing machine taps: the landlord’s evidence is that the taps were damaged, most likely when the tenant’s washing machine was removed. There is photographic evidence of the damage. The plumber’s invoice of $321.88 and the cost of materials ($21.88) is sought, and is awarded.
The above damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
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. Filing fee and name suppression
Because the landlord has been successful, the tenant is to pay the landlord’s filing fee. The landlord’s request for name suppression is granted on the same basis.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4885459 — net $4,404.07 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 2.4.2024	$3,315.00	Rent arrears to 2.4.2024
Water rates	$276.70	Water rates
Electricity	$266.41	Electricity
Key & swipe card replacement	$172.50	Key & swipe card replacement
Mailbox key	$11.73	Mailbox key
Cleaning	$100.00	Cleaning
Wall repairs	$1,227.53	Wall repairs
Repairs: washing machine taps	$343.76	Repairs: washing machine taps
Repairs: wardrobe door	$250.00	Repairs: wardrobe door
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$4,404.07
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,404.07

Order

The Tribunal removes the name of the second named respondent, as the available evidence does not show that this person is a tenant of the premises.
Roimata Jasmine Epere must pay [The landlord/s] $4,404.07 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,580.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

Only the landlord attended the hearing. There was no appearance by the tenant. Being satisfied that the tenant had been notified, the hearing proceeded in her absence.
This tenancy began on 29 January 2022 and ended on 2 April 2024.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, outgoings, compensation, payment from the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. The hearing was adjourned part-heard so the landlord could provide additional evidence, which was not available at the time of the hearing. This has since been provided and the hearing closed on 26 August 2024.

How much is owed for rent, water and electricity?

The tenancy ended by mutual agreement on 2 April 2024. The landlord produced evidence of text messages exchanged with the tenant, establishing the ending of the tenancy.
The landlord seeks rent arrears, water and electricity charges. Rent records, water rates and electricity invoices were provided, 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) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the RTA).
The landlord claims the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy. The photographic evidence establishes part of the claim for cleaning costs, so from the amount sought of $280, based on an invoice, $100.00 is awarded. The standard to be met by the tenant is to leave the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy condition. There may be some additional cleaning that a landlord needs to do to bring the premises up to a standard acceptable for new tenants, so, on this basis, the full amount sought is not awarded.
The tenant returned one set of keys and swipe card, but the other key and swipe card were not returned. A $50.00 deposit was paid by the tenant for the second set. The landlord claims a further key and swipe card was given to the tenant and was not returned. The landlord provided an email from the apartment managers confirming that each swipe card was $50 plus GST and each key was $50 plus GST. There is also evidence of text exchanges between the landlord and tenant. I consider it reasonable for the landlord to be compensated for three missing items (3 x $50.00 plus GST), since the deposit has been retained for the fourth item. A mailbox key was also not returned and had to be replaced, at the cost of $11.73.
The amounts ordered above are proved.
The claim for the heat pump remote holder is dismissed, due to the lack of evidence of the cost to replace it. General principles regarding responsibility for damage
The landlord claims compensation for damage. To be successful, 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 of the RTA.
Where the damage is careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B of the RTA applies. 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) of the 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) of the 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) of the RTA.
In this case the landlord is not insured for tenant damage. The rent for the premises is $400.00 per week.
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) of the 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.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

From the photographic, oral, and documentary evidence produced by the landlord, I am satisfied that the following damage was caused during the tenancy: • Wall repairs: there is one large hole on the wall located on the right-hand side of the large window in the studio apartment, and there is a further hole near the wardrobe door. The repair cost, including plastering, painting and materials, is $1,227.53. The landlord states the apartment was built in 2019, with all walls being in good condition at the start of the tenancy. • Damage to the wardrobe door: the wardrobe door, with a mirror in it, was damaged and required repair. The landlord seeks $300.00 ($200.00 was originally sought). The invoice provided by the landlord includes other work, so a portion of this invoice is awarded, and $250.00 compensation is considered reasonable. • Washing machine taps: the landlord’s evidence is that the taps were damaged, most likely when the tenant’s washing machine was removed. There is photographic evidence of the damage. The plumber’s invoice of $321.88 and the cost of materials ($21.88) is sought, and is awarded.
The above damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
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. Filing fee and name suppression
Because the landlord has been successful, the tenant is to pay the landlord’s filing fee. The landlord’s request for name suppression is granted on the same basis.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4885459 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4885459 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent, water and electricity?

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, water and electricity?

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