What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4910333 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 4910333?

Rubbish Removal: $446.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $57.00 awarded to landlord; Compensation: $154.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $826.33 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Blinds: $103.50 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Rugs: $700.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4910333?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4910333?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10729959-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4910333 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 4910333?

Rubbish Removal: $446.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $57.00 awarded to landlord; Compensation: $154.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $826.33 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Blinds: $103.50 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Rugs: $700.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4910333?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4910333?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10729959-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

66 Salisbury Street, Levin, Levin 5510 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4910333 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

66 Salisbury Street, Levin, Levin 5510 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4910333 — Property damage | TenantCheck

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4910333 — net $327.27 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning: and rubbish removal	$446.00	Cleaning: and rubbish removal
Cleaning: flea bombs	$57.00	Cleaning: flea bombs
Repairs	$826.33	Repairs
Replace furnishings: rugs	$700.00	Replace furnishings: rugs
Replace furnishings: blinds	$103.50	Replace furnishings: blinds
Compensation	$154.00	Compensation
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$327.27
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$327.27

Claims and awards for application 4910333 — net $327.27 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Cleaning: and rubbish removal

Amount: $446.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning: and rubbish removal

Cleaning: flea bombs

Amount: $57.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning: flea bombs

Repairs

Amount: $826.33
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs

Replace furnishings: rugs

Amount: $700.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Replace furnishings: rugs

Replace furnishings: blinds

Amount: $103.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Replace furnishings: blinds

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Rubbish Removal Cleanliness Compensation Filing Fee Property damage

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
Hinemoa Iwikau and Aaliyah Lara Huaki must pay [The landlord/s] $327.27 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,980.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately. DescriptionLandlord Cleaning: and rubbish removal$446.00 Cleaning: flea bombs$57.00 Repairs$826.33 Replace furnishings: rugs$700.00 Replace furnishings: blinds$103.50 Compensation$154.00 Filing fee reimbursement$20.44 Total award$2,307.27 Bond$1,980.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$327.27

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing.
The tenant did not attend the hearing.
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 provided photographic evidence tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish.
The landlord advised that the tenant had a dog at the property and that the landlord had not consented to its presence. The landlord provided evidence that the property was infested with fleas at the end of the tenancy. The landlord had to use a bomb to eradicate the infestation and the property could not be occupied for a period.
It is appropriate to award a sum equivalent to two days rent in compensation being the period required before the property could be safely reoccupied.
The following chattels were missing at the end of the tenancy: a. A rug. b. Two blinds.
The landlord gave evidence that: a. Three other rugs were unable to be cleaned because of dog damage and were destroyed. b. A blind in the bathroom was damaged by the dog and required replacement.
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 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 provided photographic evidence that following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. There were a number of areas on doors, door frames and window sills damaged by dog claw marks. b. There were two holes in walls.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved.
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4910333 — net $327.27 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning: and rubbish removal	$446.00	Cleaning: and rubbish removal
Cleaning: flea bombs	$57.00	Cleaning: flea bombs
Repairs	$826.33	Repairs
Replace furnishings: rugs	$700.00	Replace furnishings: rugs
Replace furnishings: blinds	$103.50	Replace furnishings: blinds
Compensation	$154.00	Compensation
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$327.27
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$327.27

Claims and awards for application 4910333 — net $327.27 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Cleaning: and rubbish removal

Amount: $446.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning: and rubbish removal

Cleaning: flea bombs

Amount: $57.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning: flea bombs

Repairs

Amount: $826.33
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs

Replace furnishings: rugs

Amount: $700.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Replace furnishings: rugs

Replace furnishings: blinds

Amount: $103.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Replace furnishings: blinds

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Rubbish Removal Cleanliness Compensation Filing Fee Property damage

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
Hinemoa Iwikau and Aaliyah Lara Huaki must pay [The landlord/s] $327.27 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,980.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately. DescriptionLandlord Cleaning: and rubbish removal$446.00 Cleaning: flea bombs$57.00 Repairs$826.33 Replace furnishings: rugs$700.00 Replace furnishings: blinds$103.50 Compensation$154.00 Filing fee reimbursement$20.44 Total award$2,307.27 Bond$1,980.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$327.27

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing.
The tenant did not attend the hearing.
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 provided photographic evidence tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish.
The landlord advised that the tenant had a dog at the property and that the landlord had not consented to its presence. The landlord provided evidence that the property was infested with fleas at the end of the tenancy. The landlord had to use a bomb to eradicate the infestation and the property could not be occupied for a period.
It is appropriate to award a sum equivalent to two days rent in compensation being the period required before the property could be safely reoccupied.
The following chattels were missing at the end of the tenancy: a. A rug. b. Two blinds.
The landlord gave evidence that: a. Three other rugs were unable to be cleaned because of dog damage and were destroyed. b. A blind in the bathroom was damaged by the dog and required replacement.
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 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 provided photographic evidence that following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. There were a number of areas on doors, door frames and window sills damaged by dog claw marks. b. There were two holes in walls.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved.
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4910333 — Property damage at 66 Salisbury Street, Levin, Levin 5510

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4910333 — Property damage at 66 Salisbury Street, Levin, Levin 5510

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

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

Frequently asked questions