What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4926339?

The tribunal order states: Wei Liu and Steven Wray must pay David Thomas Ryan $1,956.40

How much money was awarded in case 4926339?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lightbulbs: $2.11 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $9.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $60.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,812.14 awarded to landlord; Replace Missing Handle: $5.21 awarded to landlord; Replace Missing Rubbish Bin: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $20.00 awarded to landlord; Trade Me Advertising: $299.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4926339?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4926339?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10967721-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4926339?

The tribunal order states: Wei Liu and Steven Wray must pay David Thomas Ryan $1,956.40

How much money was awarded in case 4926339?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lightbulbs: $2.11 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $9.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $60.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,812.14 awarded to landlord; Replace Missing Handle: $5.21 awarded to landlord; Replace Missing Rubbish Bin: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $20.00 awarded to landlord; Trade Me Advertising: $299.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4926339?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4926339?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10967721-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 1, 201 The Terrace, Wellington Central, Wellington Tenancy Tribunal Case 4926339 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Unit/Flat 1, 201 The Terrace, Wellington Central, Wellington Tenancy Tribunal Case 4926339 — Rent arrears | 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 4926339 — net $1,956.40 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears from 25.5.24 to 24.6.24	$2,812.14		Rent arrears from 25.5.24 to 24.6.24
Trade Me Advertising	$299.00		Trade Me Advertising
Rubbish removal: tip fee	$20.00		Rubbish removal: tip fee
Replace missing rubbish bin	$28.00		Replace missing rubbish bin
Replace missing handle	$5.21		Replace missing handle
Lock/key replacement	$9.50		Lock/key replacement
Light bulbs	$2.11		Light bulbs
Replace damaged coffee table	$60.00		Replace damaged coffee table
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44		Filing fee reimbursement
Bond received by the landlord		$1,300.00	Bond received by the landlord
Total award	$3,256.40	$1,300.00
Net award	$1,956.40
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,956.40

Claims and awards for application 4926339 — net $1,956.40 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears from 25.5.24 to 24.6.24

Amount: $2,812.14
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears from 25.5.24 to 24.6.24

Trade Me Advertising

Amount: $299.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Trade Me Advertising

Rubbish removal: tip fee

Amount: $20.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal: tip fee

Replace missing rubbish bin

Amount: $28.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Replace missing rubbish bin

Replace missing handle

Amount: $5.21
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Replace missing handle

Dismissed claims

Other Claims — All other claims dismissed

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Filing Fee Property damage Rent arrears Rubbish Removal

Order

Wei Liu and Steven Wray must pay David Thomas Ryan $1,956.40 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
All other claims are dismissed

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing with Mr Ryan and Mr Wray present.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. The bond has already been refunded to the landlord.

How much is owed for rent and advertising?

The tenancy was for a fixed term commencing on 18 November 2023 and to end on 18 November 2024. The tenants left the tenancy early, vacating the premises on 2 June 2024. They did not obtain the landlord’s consent to mutually end the tenancy early and nor did they find other tenants to take over the tenancy. However, the landlord advertised and a new tenancy commenced on 25 June 2024.
I am satisfied on the evidence that, having agreed to a fixed term tenancy, the tenants are liable for rent until the date of commencement of the new tenancy. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.
Given that the tenants left the tenancy almost 5 months before expiry of the fixed term, I am satisfied that they are liable for the landlord’s costs of readvertising the premises for let on Trade Me because they are extra costs incurred as a result of the tenants’ breach of the fixed term tenancy agreement.

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 (RTA). The tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The tenants did not remove all rubbish at the end of the tenancy with a cat cage, food in the fridge and blown lightbulbs left behind. They also damaged a coffee table which the landlord had to dispose of. The landlord also alleges that the tenants dumped other items on the section such as bed framing, toys and other miscellaneous items. Mr Ryan is adamant that he had seen the bed framing in the house during the tenancy. Mr Wray denies dumping items on the section and says that other people had access to the area and used it as a dumping ground from time to time. He says the bed framing did not belong to the tenants.
I cannot resolve the conflict of evidence regarding items dumped on the section but, regardless, I am satisfied that there were items left by the tenants that could not be disposed of through the general rubbish collection and the landlord incurred a tip fee to dispose of them at the Southern Landfill. The tenant is liable for the cost.
The tenant did not return all the keys.
The following chattels were missing at the end of the tenancy and had to be replaced: kitchen rubbish bin, desk handle. The landlord also had to replace a light bulb.
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.
I am satisfied on the evidence that the tenant left an interior coffee table, supplied by the landlord, outside and it was damaged by the weather. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The landlord purchased a second-hand table for $60, which I consider was a reasonable replacement.
The landlord also claimed the cost of replacing a rug they supplied which was damaged by crayon marks. Unfortunately, the landlord was unable to provide a photo of the rug to prove the damage and I must dismiss the claim.
As the landlord has substantially succeeded with his claims, he is entitled to reimbursement of the filing fee.
The Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case party who substantially succeeds. The tenant applied for suppression but did not substantially succeed in defending the claims. Therefore his application for suppression is declined. K Stirling, 17 October 2024

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 4926339 — net $1,956.40 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears from 25.5.24 to 24.6.24	$2,812.14		Rent arrears from 25.5.24 to 24.6.24
Trade Me Advertising	$299.00		Trade Me Advertising
Rubbish removal: tip fee	$20.00		Rubbish removal: tip fee
Replace missing rubbish bin	$28.00		Replace missing rubbish bin
Replace missing handle	$5.21		Replace missing handle
Lock/key replacement	$9.50		Lock/key replacement
Light bulbs	$2.11		Light bulbs
Replace damaged coffee table	$60.00		Replace damaged coffee table
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44		Filing fee reimbursement
Bond received by the landlord		$1,300.00	Bond received by the landlord
Total award	$3,256.40	$1,300.00
Net award	$1,956.40
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,956.40

Claims and awards for application 4926339 — net $1,956.40 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears from 25.5.24 to 24.6.24

Amount: $2,812.14
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears from 25.5.24 to 24.6.24

Trade Me Advertising

Amount: $299.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Trade Me Advertising

Rubbish removal: tip fee

Amount: $20.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal: tip fee

Replace missing rubbish bin

Amount: $28.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Replace missing rubbish bin

Replace missing handle

Amount: $5.21
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Replace missing handle

Dismissed claims

Other Claims — All other claims dismissed

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Filing Fee Property damage Rent arrears Rubbish Removal

Order

Wei Liu and Steven Wray must pay David Thomas Ryan $1,956.40 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
All other claims are dismissed

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing with Mr Ryan and Mr Wray present.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. The bond has already been refunded to the landlord.

How much is owed for rent and advertising?

The tenancy was for a fixed term commencing on 18 November 2023 and to end on 18 November 2024. The tenants left the tenancy early, vacating the premises on 2 June 2024. They did not obtain the landlord’s consent to mutually end the tenancy early and nor did they find other tenants to take over the tenancy. However, the landlord advertised and a new tenancy commenced on 25 June 2024.
I am satisfied on the evidence that, having agreed to a fixed term tenancy, the tenants are liable for rent until the date of commencement of the new tenancy. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.
Given that the tenants left the tenancy almost 5 months before expiry of the fixed term, I am satisfied that they are liable for the landlord’s costs of readvertising the premises for let on Trade Me because they are extra costs incurred as a result of the tenants’ breach of the fixed term tenancy agreement.

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 (RTA). The tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The tenants did not remove all rubbish at the end of the tenancy with a cat cage, food in the fridge and blown lightbulbs left behind. They also damaged a coffee table which the landlord had to dispose of. The landlord also alleges that the tenants dumped other items on the section such as bed framing, toys and other miscellaneous items. Mr Ryan is adamant that he had seen the bed framing in the house during the tenancy. Mr Wray denies dumping items on the section and says that other people had access to the area and used it as a dumping ground from time to time. He says the bed framing did not belong to the tenants.
I cannot resolve the conflict of evidence regarding items dumped on the section but, regardless, I am satisfied that there were items left by the tenants that could not be disposed of through the general rubbish collection and the landlord incurred a tip fee to dispose of them at the Southern Landfill. The tenant is liable for the cost.
The tenant did not return all the keys.
The following chattels were missing at the end of the tenancy and had to be replaced: kitchen rubbish bin, desk handle. The landlord also had to replace a light bulb.
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.
I am satisfied on the evidence that the tenant left an interior coffee table, supplied by the landlord, outside and it was damaged by the weather. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The landlord purchased a second-hand table for $60, which I consider was a reasonable replacement.
The landlord also claimed the cost of replacing a rug they supplied which was damaged by crayon marks. Unfortunately, the landlord was unable to provide a photo of the rug to prove the damage and I must dismiss the claim.
As the landlord has substantially succeeded with his claims, he is entitled to reimbursement of the filing fee.
The Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case party who substantially succeeds. The tenant applied for suppression but did not substantially succeed in defending the claims. Therefore his application for suppression is declined. K Stirling, 17 October 2024

Tenancy Tribunal case 4926339 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 1, 201 The Terrace, Wellington Central, Wellington

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4926339 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 1, 201 The Terrace, Wellington Central, Wellington

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent and advertising?

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

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent and advertising?

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