What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4923042 about?

The tribunal order states: Alani Devine, Harrison Free, Ben Harding and Daniel Sherriff must pay [The

How much money was awarded in case 4923042?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $3,100.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $110.71 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4923042?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4923042?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10707926-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4923042 about?

The tribunal order states: Alani Devine, Harrison Free, Ben Harding and Daniel Sherriff must pay [The

How much money was awarded in case 4923042?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $3,100.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $110.71 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4923042?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4923042?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10707926-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

96 Queen Street, North Dunedin, Dunedin 9016 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4923042 — Property damage

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4923042 — net $131.15 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 31/12/2023	$110.71	Rent arrears to 31/12/2023
Replacement heat pump costs	$3,100.00	Replacement heat pump costs
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$131.15
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$131.15

The landlord and one of the tenants attended the hearing.

The tenants sought a refund of their bond.

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

Although the landlord’s application included compensation claims for a broken window, rubbish removal and lock and curtain replacement these were withdrawn at the hearing.

The only outstanding compensation claim was for replacement of the heat pump.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 31/12/2023.

The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing.

Although the tenant was unaware of the arrears, he did not dispute these were owed.

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.

The landlord sought compensation of $4,115.67 as follows: a. $465.67 service fee re damage to heat pump, b. $3,650.00 for replacement of the heat pump.

The landlord believed the damage was intentional following an incident on 5/5/2023 when the heat pump was pulled off the wall in the premises.

In support of their claim the landlord relied on a report from a property manager about a meeting with the mother of the person who the tenants’ believed was responsible, suggesting that other people were also involved in the incident.

On the other hand, the tenants did not dispute damage had occurred but that the damage had been caused by an invited guest standing on a chair or couch arm, reaching up to locate something on the wall mounted heat pump, slipping against the appliance and causing it to fall off the wall.

The tenant who appeared at the hearing gave evidence about what happened, and two other tenants provided written statements.

There is no dispute that the heat pump was damaged during the tenancy by person in the premises with the consent of the tenants.

The damage is more than fair wear and tear.

Where the damage is careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies.

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.

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.

I am not persuaded by the landlord’s evidence that the damage to the heat pump was intentional.

A statement made by the mother of the person who caused the damage clearly states she believed the damage was accidental, and indeed offered to make a contribution to the landlord towards the costs of replacement of the unit.

The tenant who appeared at the hearing stated the damage was accidental, as did the two tenants who provided statements.

The landlord did not have contents insurance at the time for the premises and was unable to make a claim.

As the damage was not covered by insurance, I find the tenants’ liability for the damage is limited to the equivalent of four weeks rent.

An award has been made accordingly.

It is open for the tenants to pursue in the Disputes Tribunal the individual whom they believe was responsible for the damage and subsequent costs.

The Tenancy Tribunal can only deal with disputes between landlords and tenants, not tenants and third parties.

As [The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must award the filing fee.

Suppression is granted to the landlord pursuant to section 95A because they were wholly successful with the claim.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4923042 — net $131.15 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 31/12/2023	$110.71	Rent arrears to 31/12/2023
Replacement heat pump costs	$3,100.00	Replacement heat pump costs
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$131.15
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$131.15

Order

Alani Devine, Harrison Free, Ben Harding and Daniel Sherriff must pay [The landlord/s] $131.15 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,100.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

The landlord and one of the tenants attended the hearing.
The tenants sought a refund of their bond.
The landlord cross applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
Although the landlord’s application included compensation claims for a broken window, rubbish removal and lock and curtain replacement these were withdrawn at the hearing.
The only outstanding compensation claim was for replacement of the heat pump.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 31/12/2023.
The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing.
Although the tenant was unaware of the arrears, he did not dispute these were owed.

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.
The landlord sought compensation of $4,115.67 as follows: a. $465.67 service fee re damage to heat pump, b. $3,650.00 for replacement of the heat pump.
The landlord believed the damage was intentional following an incident on 5/5/2023 when the heat pump was pulled off the wall in the premises.
In support of their claim the landlord relied on a report from a property manager about a meeting with the mother of the person who the tenants’ believed was responsible, suggesting that other people were also involved in the incident.
On the other hand, the tenants did not dispute damage had occurred but that the damage had been caused by an invited guest standing on a chair or couch arm, reaching up to locate something on the wall mounted heat pump, slipping against the appliance and causing it to fall off the wall.
The tenant who appeared at the hearing gave evidence about what happened, and two other tenants provided written statements.
There is no dispute that the heat pump was damaged during the tenancy by person in the premises with the consent of the tenants.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear.
Where the damage is careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies.
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.
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.
I am not persuaded by the landlord’s evidence that the damage to the heat pump was intentional.
A statement made by the mother of the person who caused the damage clearly states she believed the damage was accidental, and indeed offered to make a contribution to the landlord towards the costs of replacement of the unit.
The tenant who appeared at the hearing stated the damage was accidental, as did the two tenants who provided statements.
The landlord did not have contents insurance at the time for the premises and was unable to make a claim.
As the damage was not covered by insurance, I find the tenants’ liability for the damage is limited to the equivalent of four weeks rent.
An award has been made accordingly.
It is open for the tenants to pursue in the Disputes Tribunal the individual whom they believe was responsible for the damage and subsequent costs.
The Tenancy Tribunal can only deal with disputes between landlords and tenants, not tenants and third parties.
As [The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must award the filing fee.
Suppression is granted to the landlord pursuant to section 95A because they were wholly successful with the claim.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4923042 — Property damage at 96 Queen Street, North Dunedin, Dunedin 9016

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4923042 — Property damage at 96 Queen Street, North Dunedin, Dunedin 9016

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much 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 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