What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4914301 about?

The tribunal order states: Savannah Pitcher must pay [The landlord/s] $1,867.41 immediately for vacated

How much money was awarded in case 4914301?

Replace furnishings: curtains in lou…: $1,453.91 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: lounge rug (min…: $93.50 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: mattress protec…: $50.00 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: toilet brush, c…: $70.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4914301?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4914301?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10869504-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4914301 about?

The tribunal order states: Savannah Pitcher must pay [The landlord/s] $1,867.41 immediately for vacated

How much money was awarded in case 4914301?

Replace furnishings: curtains in lou…: $1,453.91 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: lounge rug (min…: $93.50 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: mattress protec…: $50.00 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: toilet brush, c…: $70.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4914301?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4914301?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10869504-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit/Flat Flat 17, 147 Quay Street, Auckland Central, Tenancy Tribunal Case 4914301 — Tenancy dispute

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4914301 — net $1,667.41 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Replace furnishings: curtains in lounge (minus 15	$1,453.91	Replace furnishings: curtains in lounge (minus 15
Replace furnishings: lounge rug (minus 15	$93.50	Replace furnishings: lounge rug (minus 15
Replace furnishings: mattress protector	$50.00	Replace furnishings: mattress protector
Replace furnishings: toilet brush, cups, cutlery, pot, cloth	$70.00	Replace furnishings: toilet brush, cups, cutlery, pot, cloth
Net award	$1,667.41
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,667.41

Order

Savannah Pitcher must pay [The landlord/s] $1,867.41 immediately for vacated costs after the termination of the tenancy on 30 July 2024, as calculated and shown in table below: DescriptionLandlord Replace furnishings: curtains in lounge (minus 15%)$1,453.91 Replace furnishings: lounge rug (minus 15%)$93.50 Replace furnishings: mattress protector$50.00 Replace furnishings: toilet brush, cups, cutlery, pot, cloth$70.00 Total award$1,667.41 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$1,667.41

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing, the tenant did not attend.
I rang the mobile number of the tenant, but it went straight to answerphone. The tenant was sent a notice of hearing. I am proceeding with the hearing in her absence.
This was the second of two-hearing relating to this tenancy. On 30 July 2024 I order the termination of the tenancy, rent arrears of $7892.85 and the filing fee.
The hearing was adjourned on that day to allow the landlord to gain assess to the property and assess the vacated costs. This hearing was scheduled to deal with the vacated costs.
The landlord is claiming the costs of replacing the lounge drapes, floor rug, mattress protector, missing utilities, and cleaning.

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 says that the tenant did not clean the property and remove rubbish at the end of the tenancy.
The landlord has provided an invoice for the work he carried out himself for the cleaning. I would consider the invoice; however, the landlord has not proved proof of the unclean condition of the property. Without proof of the property being left unclean, such as an exit report and photos I cannot accept this claim.
I dismiss the landlords claim for cleaning.
The landlord provided an invoice for the cost of relacing missing coffee cups, cutlery, tablecloth, and toilet brush.
This was furnished apartment, and these items were listed on the inventory at the start of the tenancy. The landlord has provided an invoice for $70.00 from Briscoe’s the cost of the replacement of these items.
I am satisfied that the landlord has proven his claim for the missing utilities. Repairs and damages:
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 Residential tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
Where the damage is caused carelessly and is covered by the landlord’s insurance, the tenant 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 9 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 or 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 intentional where a person does something, or allows a situation to continue, knowing that damage is a certainty. See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 154.
The landlord claims that the follow damage occurred during this tenancy: -Curtains in lounge were snagged and ripped. -The lounge floor rug was heavily stained. -Mattress protector was heavily stained. -Sink was blocked. -Paintwork in bathroom, lounge and dining area were scuffed.
The landlord has provided photos of the damaged rug, curtains and mattress protector and invoices for the cost of their replacement.
The mattress protector was very heavily stained to the extent that washing could not remedy the condition of the item. Similarly, the landlord attempted to do repeated deep cleans on the rug, but the stains were unable to be removed.
The landlord has provided an invoice for $110.00 for the rug and $50.00 for the mattress protector.
The curtains were in excellent condition at the start of the tenancy, but at the end of the tenancy the curtains were in poor condition with rips, pulling of the threads and snags. The tenant brought a cat into the property contrary to her tenancy agreement. The landlord believes the cat is responsible for the damage to the curtains. The landlord provided photos of the damage to the curtains and an invoice for $1674.41 for the replacement curtains.
I am satisfied that the landlord has proven their claim for the damaged curtains, mattress protector and rug. All three items were purchased 18 months ago.
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.
The landlord sought $1674.41 for the curtains and the labour to hang the curtains, and $110 for a new rug and $50 for a new mattress protector. I am taking 15% depreciation for the age of the curtains and the rug.
The landlord is claiming labour costs to do maintenance on the property, such as unblocking a sink, touch up painting in the bathroom, lounge, and dining rooms. I do not have proof of the repairs and repainting that he is claiming for.
For completeness I am awarding the landlord $1597.41 for the curtains, rug and mattress protector, minus depreciation. I am dismissing the sink unblocking and repainting costs.
The bond was refunded to the landlord after the last hearing to offset the debt owed by the tenant to the landlord.
The landlord has applied for suppression of his name and details and as he has been successful, I will grant suppression of his name and details.
The filing fee was reimbursed in the last order dated 30 July 2024.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4914301 — net $1,667.41 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Replace furnishings: curtains in lounge (minus 15	$1,453.91	Replace furnishings: curtains in lounge (minus 15
Replace furnishings: lounge rug (minus 15	$93.50	Replace furnishings: lounge rug (minus 15
Replace furnishings: mattress protector	$50.00	Replace furnishings: mattress protector
Replace furnishings: toilet brush, cups, cutlery, pot, cloth	$70.00	Replace furnishings: toilet brush, cups, cutlery, pot, cloth
Net award	$1,667.41
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,667.41

Order

Savannah Pitcher must pay [The landlord/s] $1,867.41 immediately for vacated costs after the termination of the tenancy on 30 July 2024, as calculated and shown in table below: DescriptionLandlord Replace furnishings: curtains in lounge (minus 15%)$1,453.91 Replace furnishings: lounge rug (minus 15%)$93.50 Replace furnishings: mattress protector$50.00 Replace furnishings: toilet brush, cups, cutlery, pot, cloth$70.00 Total award$1,667.41 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$1,667.41

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing, the tenant did not attend.
I rang the mobile number of the tenant, but it went straight to answerphone. The tenant was sent a notice of hearing. I am proceeding with the hearing in her absence.
This was the second of two-hearing relating to this tenancy. On 30 July 2024 I order the termination of the tenancy, rent arrears of $7892.85 and the filing fee.
The hearing was adjourned on that day to allow the landlord to gain assess to the property and assess the vacated costs. This hearing was scheduled to deal with the vacated costs.
The landlord is claiming the costs of replacing the lounge drapes, floor rug, mattress protector, missing utilities, and cleaning.

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 says that the tenant did not clean the property and remove rubbish at the end of the tenancy.
The landlord has provided an invoice for the work he carried out himself for the cleaning. I would consider the invoice; however, the landlord has not proved proof of the unclean condition of the property. Without proof of the property being left unclean, such as an exit report and photos I cannot accept this claim.
I dismiss the landlords claim for cleaning.
The landlord provided an invoice for the cost of relacing missing coffee cups, cutlery, tablecloth, and toilet brush.
This was furnished apartment, and these items were listed on the inventory at the start of the tenancy. The landlord has provided an invoice for $70.00 from Briscoe’s the cost of the replacement of these items.
I am satisfied that the landlord has proven his claim for the missing utilities. Repairs and damages:
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 Residential tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
Where the damage is caused carelessly and is covered by the landlord’s insurance, the tenant 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 9 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 or 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 intentional where a person does something, or allows a situation to continue, knowing that damage is a certainty. See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 154.
The landlord claims that the follow damage occurred during this tenancy: -Curtains in lounge were snagged and ripped. -The lounge floor rug was heavily stained. -Mattress protector was heavily stained. -Sink was blocked. -Paintwork in bathroom, lounge and dining area were scuffed.
The landlord has provided photos of the damaged rug, curtains and mattress protector and invoices for the cost of their replacement.
The mattress protector was very heavily stained to the extent that washing could not remedy the condition of the item. Similarly, the landlord attempted to do repeated deep cleans on the rug, but the stains were unable to be removed.
The landlord has provided an invoice for $110.00 for the rug and $50.00 for the mattress protector.
The curtains were in excellent condition at the start of the tenancy, but at the end of the tenancy the curtains were in poor condition with rips, pulling of the threads and snags. The tenant brought a cat into the property contrary to her tenancy agreement. The landlord believes the cat is responsible for the damage to the curtains. The landlord provided photos of the damage to the curtains and an invoice for $1674.41 for the replacement curtains.
I am satisfied that the landlord has proven their claim for the damaged curtains, mattress protector and rug. All three items were purchased 18 months ago.
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.
The landlord sought $1674.41 for the curtains and the labour to hang the curtains, and $110 for a new rug and $50 for a new mattress protector. I am taking 15% depreciation for the age of the curtains and the rug.
The landlord is claiming labour costs to do maintenance on the property, such as unblocking a sink, touch up painting in the bathroom, lounge, and dining rooms. I do not have proof of the repairs and repainting that he is claiming for.
For completeness I am awarding the landlord $1597.41 for the curtains, rug and mattress protector, minus depreciation. I am dismissing the sink unblocking and repainting costs.
The bond was refunded to the landlord after the last hearing to offset the debt owed by the tenant to the landlord.
The landlord has applied for suppression of his name and details and as he has been successful, I will grant suppression of his name and details.
The filing fee was reimbursed in the last order dated 30 July 2024.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4914301 — Tenancy dispute at Unit/Flat Flat 17, 147 Quay Street, Auckland Central,

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4914301 — Tenancy dispute at Unit/Flat Flat 17, 147 Quay Street, Auckland Central,

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

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?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions