What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4896300?

The tribunal order states: No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression

How much money was awarded in case 4896300?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $10,771.43 awarded to landlord; Plumber’S Fee To Unblock Bath: $143.75 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $569.25 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $727.90 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4896300?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4896300?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10635862-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4896300?

The tribunal order states: No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression

How much money was awarded in case 4896300?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $10,771.43 awarded to landlord; Plumber’S Fee To Unblock Bath: $143.75 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $569.25 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $727.90 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4896300?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4896300?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10635862-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

124A St Stephens Avenue, Parnell, Auckland 1052 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4896300 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4896300 — net $7,232.77 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 22 June 2024	$10,771.43	Rent arrears to 22 June 2024
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Rubbish removal	$569.25	Rubbish removal
Water rates	$727.90	Water rates
Repairs: plumber’s fee to unblock bath	$143.75	Repairs: plumber’s fee to unblock bath
Net award	$7,232.77
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$7,232.77

Order

No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.
Raniah El-Nafeh and Fawas El-Nafeh must pay Impressa Properties Limited $7,232.77 immediately, being rent arrears to 22 June 2024, filing fee reimbursement, rubbish removal, unpaid water rates and repairs, less the bond, calculated as shown in the table below.
The Bond Centre is to transfer the bond of $5,000.00 (3294440-006) for 2/27 St Georges Bay Road, Parnell to this tenancy and pay to Impressa Properties Limited immediately.
The Court Registry is to send a copy of this Order to the Official Assignee’s office for their information citing: Fawaz El-Nafeh and reference 903324.

Reasons

Mr Cathcart attended the hearing as a representative for the landlord. Mr El- Nafeh attended the hearing. Ms El-Nafeh did not attend the hearing. However, Mr El Nafeh said he had authority to speak for her.
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 landlord advised during the hearing that it was also seeking reimbursement for a towel rail. This was not included in the application form and the tenant did not consent to having that matter heard. Other matters:
Prior to the start of this tenancy, the tenant rented another premises from the landlord and a bond of $5,000 was paid to the Bond Centre in respect of that tenancy. In December 2022, the parties completed a bond transfer form whereby they both agreed that the bond would transfer from that tenancy to the tenancy at 124A St Stephens Avenue, Parnell, Auckland 1052. It is unclear whether the form was submitted to the Bond Centre or not. In any event, that bond is still recorded as being held for the previous tenancy. I order the Bond Centre to transfer this bond to this tenancy and pay the bond to the landlord.
During the hearing, Mr El-Nafeh advised that he had been adjudicated bankrupt. The Insolvency Register’s records confirm that Mr El-Nafeh has been adjudicated bankrupt and that this occurred on 27 July 2023. The amounts claimed by the landlord relate to the period after Mr El-Nafeh was adjudicated bankrupt. The Court Registry shall send a copy of this Order to the Official Assignee’s office for their information.

How much is owed for rent arrears and water rates?

The tenancy ended on 22 June 2024. The landlord provided rent records in the form of a rent ledger proving the amount owed. The tenant did not dispute this amount. The landlord provided a ledger for unpaid water consumption rates proving the amount owed. These claims are granted.

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) provides that 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.
The landlord has provided photographs which prove the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The landlord has provided a quotation of $875.00 plus GST to clean the property. The landlord confirmed that an invoice has not been provided because the cleaning has not been done. Claims for compensation need to be in relation to actual losses incurred by the landlord. As the work has not been done, the landlord has not suffered a loss. This claim is dismissed.
The landlord provided an invoice for $569.25 for rubbish removal and photographs that show the rubbish left at the property. I am satisfied that this was a reasonable sum for the rubbish removed and that the work was undertaken and paid for. This claim is granted.
The landlord has provided a quote to replace the Chorus box which it says was taken from the premise. The tenant confirmed that the Chorus box was accidentally taken with his belongings. The landlord said that there was no invoice and the box had not been replaced because it had been agreed with he tenant that the tenant was to search their belongings for the box. The tenant confirmed at the hearing that they have searched but been unable to locate the Chorus box. As the box has not been replaced, the cost has not yet been incurred and, for this reason, I dismiss the claim.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The landlord claims that the tenant left the bath blocked and is claiming $143.75 for the plumber’s fee.
Sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49Bmn of the RTA provide that it is for the landlord to 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.
Section 49B(3)(a) of the RTA provides that 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). Section 49B(3)(b) of the RTA provides that 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).
The landlord asserts that the tenant left the bath blocked. The tenant said they did not use the bath. The landlord has provided before and after photographs of the bath and an invoice from a plumber dated 25 July 2024 for $143.75. In this invoice, it states “bath waste was blocked with sea shells” and that the work performed was to “remove sea shells and test”.
I accept that the bath was blocked with seashells, that this damage occurred during the tenancy and is more likely than not to have been either intentional or negligent. Given that the small sum involved is less than 4 x the weekly rent and the insurance excess, I do not need to determine whether the blocking of the drain was intentional or negligent. The claim is proved, and this sum is awarded to the landlord.
Impressa Properties Limited has substantially succeeded with the claim. For this reason, I have ordered reimbursement of the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4896300 — net $7,232.77 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 22 June 2024	$10,771.43	Rent arrears to 22 June 2024
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Rubbish removal	$569.25	Rubbish removal
Water rates	$727.90	Water rates
Repairs: plumber’s fee to unblock bath	$143.75	Repairs: plumber’s fee to unblock bath
Net award	$7,232.77
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$7,232.77

Order

No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.
Raniah El-Nafeh and Fawas El-Nafeh must pay Impressa Properties Limited $7,232.77 immediately, being rent arrears to 22 June 2024, filing fee reimbursement, rubbish removal, unpaid water rates and repairs, less the bond, calculated as shown in the table below.
The Bond Centre is to transfer the bond of $5,000.00 (3294440-006) for 2/27 St Georges Bay Road, Parnell to this tenancy and pay to Impressa Properties Limited immediately.
The Court Registry is to send a copy of this Order to the Official Assignee’s office for their information citing: Fawaz El-Nafeh and reference 903324.

Reasons

Mr Cathcart attended the hearing as a representative for the landlord. Mr El- Nafeh attended the hearing. Ms El-Nafeh did not attend the hearing. However, Mr El Nafeh said he had authority to speak for her.
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 landlord advised during the hearing that it was also seeking reimbursement for a towel rail. This was not included in the application form and the tenant did not consent to having that matter heard. Other matters:
Prior to the start of this tenancy, the tenant rented another premises from the landlord and a bond of $5,000 was paid to the Bond Centre in respect of that tenancy. In December 2022, the parties completed a bond transfer form whereby they both agreed that the bond would transfer from that tenancy to the tenancy at 124A St Stephens Avenue, Parnell, Auckland 1052. It is unclear whether the form was submitted to the Bond Centre or not. In any event, that bond is still recorded as being held for the previous tenancy. I order the Bond Centre to transfer this bond to this tenancy and pay the bond to the landlord.
During the hearing, Mr El-Nafeh advised that he had been adjudicated bankrupt. The Insolvency Register’s records confirm that Mr El-Nafeh has been adjudicated bankrupt and that this occurred on 27 July 2023. The amounts claimed by the landlord relate to the period after Mr El-Nafeh was adjudicated bankrupt. The Court Registry shall send a copy of this Order to the Official Assignee’s office for their information.

How much is owed for rent arrears and water rates?

The tenancy ended on 22 June 2024. The landlord provided rent records in the form of a rent ledger proving the amount owed. The tenant did not dispute this amount. The landlord provided a ledger for unpaid water consumption rates proving the amount owed. These claims are granted.

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) provides that 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.
The landlord has provided photographs which prove the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The landlord has provided a quotation of $875.00 plus GST to clean the property. The landlord confirmed that an invoice has not been provided because the cleaning has not been done. Claims for compensation need to be in relation to actual losses incurred by the landlord. As the work has not been done, the landlord has not suffered a loss. This claim is dismissed.
The landlord provided an invoice for $569.25 for rubbish removal and photographs that show the rubbish left at the property. I am satisfied that this was a reasonable sum for the rubbish removed and that the work was undertaken and paid for. This claim is granted.
The landlord has provided a quote to replace the Chorus box which it says was taken from the premise. The tenant confirmed that the Chorus box was accidentally taken with his belongings. The landlord said that there was no invoice and the box had not been replaced because it had been agreed with he tenant that the tenant was to search their belongings for the box. The tenant confirmed at the hearing that they have searched but been unable to locate the Chorus box. As the box has not been replaced, the cost has not yet been incurred and, for this reason, I dismiss the claim.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The landlord claims that the tenant left the bath blocked and is claiming $143.75 for the plumber’s fee.
Sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49Bmn of the RTA provide that it is for the landlord to 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.
Section 49B(3)(a) of the RTA provides that 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). Section 49B(3)(b) of the RTA provides that 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).
The landlord asserts that the tenant left the bath blocked. The tenant said they did not use the bath. The landlord has provided before and after photographs of the bath and an invoice from a plumber dated 25 July 2024 for $143.75. In this invoice, it states “bath waste was blocked with sea shells” and that the work performed was to “remove sea shells and test”.
I accept that the bath was blocked with seashells, that this damage occurred during the tenancy and is more likely than not to have been either intentional or negligent. Given that the small sum involved is less than 4 x the weekly rent and the insurance excess, I do not need to determine whether the blocking of the drain was intentional or negligent. The claim is proved, and this sum is awarded to the landlord.
Impressa Properties Limited has substantially succeeded with the claim. For this reason, I have ordered reimbursement of the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4896300 — Rent arrears at 124A St Stephens Avenue, Parnell, Auckland 1052

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4896300 — Rent arrears at 124A St Stephens Avenue, Parnell, Auckland 1052

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent arrears and water rates?

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

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent arrears and water rates?

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