What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4886020 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] to pay Slade Property Management And Maintenance Limited

How much money was awarded in case 4886020?

Property Damage: $727.69 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4886020?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4886020?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10665871-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4886020 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] to pay Slade Property Management And Maintenance Limited

How much money was awarded in case 4886020?

Property Damage: $727.69 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4886020?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4886020?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10665871-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

9 Hadley Street, Kawerau, Kawerau 3127 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4886020 — Property damage

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4886020 — net $727.69 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Electrical fittings replacement/repair	$727.69	Electrical fittings replacement/repair
Net award	$727.69
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$727.69

Both parties attended the hearing.

The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

The tenant has applied for refund of her bond.

How much, if anything, is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 29 April 2024. The landlord says they are entitled to a further 9 days rent as the tenant requested additional time for cleaning, garden work and repairs.

I find that the tenant has no further rent liability. The parties did not enter into a ‘licence to occupy’ for a further 9 days and there was no agreed additional rent to pay. I accept the tenant’s evidence that she no longer occupied the premises after 29 April, and when she asked for additional time to remove large items and for the yard clean-up this was agreed. The landlord has not suffered any loss in any event as there is no evidence that the next tenancy had to be delayed.

This part of the claim is dismissed.

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 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: several of the live conductors on the switchboard had been tampered with and the garage submain cable in the ceiling space had been detached from the switchboard. The landlord has provided evidence from their electrician and an invoice for $820.77 to rectify the damage, and to install a new simmerstat controller on the oven. The landlord confirmed that the amount claimed for the simmerstat controller and 30 minutes labour is fair, wear and tear and should be deducted.

I find that the damage to the power cabling and switchboard is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The tenant denied interfering with the power cabling, but I find it unlikely the damage occurred without her knowledge.

The amount ordered is proved. I have deducted $93.08 for the simmerstat controller and 30 minutes labour. Filing fee

As both parties have been partly successful, I decline to make any award for the respective filing fees. Name suppression

The landlord consents to name suppression for the tenant.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4886020 — net $727.69 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Electrical fittings replacement/repair	$727.69	Electrical fittings replacement/repair
Net award	$727.69
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$727.69

Order

[The tenant/s] to pay Slade Property Management And Maintenance Limited $727.69 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,760.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as shown in table below.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The tenant has applied for refund of her bond.

How much, if anything, is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 29 April 2024. The landlord says they are entitled to a further 9 days rent as the tenant requested additional time for cleaning, garden work and repairs.
I find that the tenant has no further rent liability. The parties did not enter into a ‘licence to occupy’ for a further 9 days and there was no agreed additional rent to pay. I accept the tenant’s evidence that she no longer occupied the premises after 29 April, and when she asked for additional time to remove large items and for the yard clean-up this was agreed. The landlord has not suffered any loss in any event as there is no evidence that the next tenancy had to be delayed.
This part of the claim is dismissed.

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 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: several of the live conductors on the switchboard had been tampered with and the garage submain cable in the ceiling space had been detached from the switchboard. The landlord has provided evidence from their electrician and an invoice for $820.77 to rectify the damage, and to install a new simmerstat controller on the oven. The landlord confirmed that the amount claimed for the simmerstat controller and 30 minutes labour is fair, wear and tear and should be deducted.
I find that the damage to the power cabling and switchboard is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The tenant denied interfering with the power cabling, but I find it unlikely the damage occurred without her knowledge.
The amount ordered is proved. I have deducted $93.08 for the simmerstat controller and 30 minutes labour. Filing fee
As both parties have been partly successful, I decline to make any award for the respective filing fees. Name suppression
The landlord consents to name suppression for the tenant.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4886020 — Property damage at 9 Hadley Street, Kawerau, Kawerau 3127

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4886020 — Property damage at 9 Hadley Street, Kawerau, Kawerau 3127

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much, if anything, is owed for rent?

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

How much, if anything, is owed for rent?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions