How much money was awarded in case 4891987?

Dismantling Structures: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $50.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $163.60 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4891987?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4891987?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10880715-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 4891987?

Dismantling Structures: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $50.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $163.60 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4891987?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4891987?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10880715-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4891987 — Property damage

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4891987 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

Tenantcheck Insights

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4891987 — net $934.04 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 13 April 2024	$163.60	Rent arrears to 13 April 2024
Door damage	$500.00	Door damage
Carpet damage	$100.00	Carpet damage
Dismantling structures	$100.00	Dismantling structures
Blind damage	$50.00	Blind damage
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$934.04
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$934.04

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the parties’ names and identifying details.

[Tenants] must pay [landlord] $934.04 from the bond, calculated as shown in the table below.

The parties’ claims are otherwise dismissed.

The Bond Centre is to pay the $1,200 bond as follows. $934.04 to [landlord] $265.96 to [tenants]

Reasons

All parties attended the hearing on 16 September 2024.

There was a previous hearing on 5 August followed by an order made on 6 August. This order should be read together with that order. The Landlord’s Claims Mediated Claims

Following a mediation the parties agreed that the tenants would pay the landlord $500 for door damage and $100 for carpet damage. I have given effect to that agreement in this order. Rent

On the tenants’ evidence their rent was paid to the end of the tenancy on 13 April 2024. According to the landlord’s rent statement, there were arrears of $797 at the end of the tenancy although the landlord limits her claim to $533.60. The tenants said that they paid $740 in cash to the landlord on Sunday 23 March 2019, being the second day of the tenancy. The landlord denied that.

The tenants said that the landlord gave them a receipt for the payment, but they have since lost it. They said that the money was withdrawn from one of their bank accounts shortly before the payment was made. I asked them to produce the bank statement showing the withdrawal and they have not been able to do so because, as they now accept, there was no such withdrawal or payment.

The tenants have produced their bank statements that show a payment of $370 to the landlord’s bank account on 18 March 2019, before the tenancy started. That is consistent with the tenancy agreement that required a weeks rent to be paid in advance. That payment is not shown in the landlord’s rent statement.

It follows that $370 must be deducted from the $533.60 that the landlord claims leaving $265.96 owing. I have therefore awarded arrears in the sum of $265.96. Underfloor Foil Insulation

The landlord said that the tenants damaged the foil insulation under the house when they put their lawnmower under there. The tenants deny that. They said that they did not keep their lawn mower under the house and that the foil was already damaged.

I am inclined to accept the tenants’ evidence. But whatever the situation was, I find that the tenants cannot have any liability for the cost of replacing the insulation under the house (with fibreglass batts) because that cost was not reasonably foreseeable. The insulation regulations require existing foil insulation to be replaced with other compliant insulation if it is not in reasonable condition. That includes when it is damaged. The regulations do not allow it to be repaired.

I find that it is not reasonable to expect the tenants to be have been aware of that. The damage to the foil was slight and unless the tenants were aware of the regulations, they would not expect such slight damage would matter let alone require the entire underfloor area to be fitted with different insulation.

The landlord pointed to the tenancy agreement that refers to the effect of the regulations. But even if the tenants had read that part of the agreement, I don’t accept that they would appreciate the potential consequences of slight damage to the foil insulation. Simply put, it is not reasonable to hold them liable for such a cost.

I note as well that the foil would need to be replaced at some time in any case, and there was already some minor damage to it. The landlord now has the benefit of far superior insulation.

This claim is therefore dismissed. Small Structures

The tenants erected some small structures on the property from materials that were there. The landlord had no objection. The tenants did not dismantle them when the tenancy ended. The landlord did not require them to be dismantled until well after the tenancy ended, when the property manager whom she appointed said that they were a hazard. It was agreed that the tenants would come back to dismantle the structures, but they contracted Covid and could not do it as arranged.

The tenants say that they should have been given the opportunity to dismantle them and so they should not be liable to pay any compensation to the landlord.

The starting point is that the tenants were responsible for dismantling the structures before the tenancy ended and they did not do so. I have some sympathy for their position, but I do not think it overcomes the fact that the structures should not have been left there without the landlord’s express consent. I have therefore awarded $100 compensation for the landlord’s time. Cleaning

The landlord’s evidence was not enough to prove the claim for cleaning the premises. It did not satisfy me that the premises were not left reasonably clean and tidy. It is therefore dismissed. Outdoor Screen

I accept that the tenant damaged the plastic outdoor screen by affixing a sign to it. I do not accept that it needs to be replaced. I accept the tenants’ evidence that the sign can be removed by using hot wet cloths and a bit of patience. I have therefore awarded $50 for the landlord’s time to do so. The Tenants’ Claims Tenants’ Work

The tenants’ claim for compensation for work done on the premises during the tenancy does not relate to the tenancy and therefore the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear it. Internet

The tenants’ claim for compensation for interruption to their internet service towards the end of the tenancy was or should have been dealt with under their previous application against the landlord. They cannot therefore make that claim under this application. Filing Fees

The landlord has had some success and so I have awarded her the filing fee. Result

The total awarded to the landlord will be paid to her from the bond. The balance of the bond will be paid to the tenants. Name Suppression

Both sides have requested name suppression. One could say both sides have had mixed success. I would describe the tenants as good tenants and it would be unfair for them to be identifiable in this order. Given that the landlord has also had some success, it is fair to grant them both name suppression.

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4891987 — net $934.04 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 13 April 2024	$163.60	Rent arrears to 13 April 2024
Door damage	$500.00	Door damage
Carpet damage	$100.00	Carpet damage
Dismantling structures	$100.00	Dismantling structures
Blind damage	$50.00	Blind damage
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$934.04
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$934.04

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the parties’ names and identifying details.

[Tenants] must pay [landlord] $934.04 from the bond, calculated as shown in the table below.

The parties’ claims are otherwise dismissed.

The Bond Centre is to pay the $1,200 bond as follows. $934.04 to [landlord] $265.96 to [tenants]

Reasons

All parties attended the hearing on 16 September 2024.

There was a previous hearing on 5 August followed by an order made on 6 August. This order should be read together with that order. The Landlord’s Claims Mediated Claims

Following a mediation the parties agreed that the tenants would pay the landlord $500 for door damage and $100 for carpet damage. I have given effect to that agreement in this order. Rent

It follows that $370 must be deducted from the $533.60 that the landlord claims leaving $265.96 owing. I have therefore awarded arrears in the sum of $265.96. Underfloor Foil Insulation

I note as well that the foil would need to be replaced at some time in any case, and there was already some minor damage to it. The landlord now has the benefit of far superior insulation.

This claim is therefore dismissed. Small Structures

The tenants say that they should have been given the opportunity to dismantle them and so they should not be liable to pay any compensation to the landlord.

The tenants’ claim for compensation for work done on the premises during the tenancy does not relate to the tenancy and therefore the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear it. Internet

The landlord has had some success and so I have awarded her the filing fee. Result

The total awarded to the landlord will be paid to her from the bond. The balance of the bond will be paid to the tenants. Name Suppression

Tenancy Tribunal case 4891987 — Property damage

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4891987 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions