What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4926756 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 4926756?

Cleaning: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $172.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $345.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $3,171.43 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $226.92 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4926756?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4926756?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11146156-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4926756 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 4926756?

Cleaning: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $172.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $345.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $3,171.43 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $226.92 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4926756?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4926756?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11146156-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

124 Carnoustie Drive, Wattle Downs, Auckland 2103 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4926756 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4926756 — net $1,915.85 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 23 June 2024	$3,171.43	Rent arrears to 23 June 2024
Water rates	$226.92	Water rates
Cleaning	$200.00	Cleaning
Carpet Cleaning	$100.00	Carpet Cleaning
Insurance excess for garage door	$500.00	Insurance excess for garage door
Repair wallpaper	$172.50	Repair wallpaper
Repair doors	$345.00	Repair doors
Net award	$1,915.85
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,915.85

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name and identifying details.
Kahla Loiuse Hotene and Peter John Tekotia must pay [The landlord/s] $1,448.35 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,800.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
As the applicant, the landlord must prove their claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

The tenancy ended on 23 June 2024. The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amounts owing at the end of the tenancy. Rent arrears were $3,171.43 and outstanding water rates were $226.92.

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 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 landlord claims the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and seeks compensation as follows: a. General cleaning: $575.00 (including GST) b. Carpet cleaning: $207.00 (including GST)
The landlord provided invoices for the above amounts.
I deal with each matter in turn below. General cleaning
The landlord provided photographs of the property taken at the end of the tenancy. These photographs are relatively few and mainly close-up shots of specific areas the landlord claims the tenant did not clean. For example, the landlord provided photographs of the top of the rangehood, toilet, blinds and one wall with spillage on it. Based on these photographs, I do not consider that the landlord has proven that the tenant left the entire property in an unreasonably clean and tidy state, only those areas shown in the photographs. The landlord would do better in the future to take photographs of each room from a wide angle to assist the Tribunal in determining the overall state the property was left at the end of the tenancy.
I have granted the landlord’s claim for an adjusted amount of $200.00. The Tribunal sees numerous applications for compensation for cleaning. The general hourly rate is $50.00. Based on the photographs provided by the landlord, I do not consider that more than 4 hours of cleaning would have been required to bring this property to a reasonably clean and tidy standard. Carpet cleaning
The landlord provided photographs of the carpet in the lounge taken at the beginning of the tenancy. It is clean and no marks or stains are present. The landlord provided photographs of the carpet in the lounge taken at the end of the tenancy. Marks and stains are present. Based on the photographs provided by the landlord, I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the tenant is responsible for the marks and stains on the carpet in the lounge. I accept that the carpet in the lounge needed to be professionally cleaned to bring the property to a reasonably clean and tidy standard.
The landlord’s claim for compensation for carpet cleaning is granted for an adjusted amount of $100.00. This reflects the fact that the landlord had the entire carpet throughout the property professionally cleaned. The landlord has only proven that the carpet in the lounge needed to be professionally cleaned. The tenant is not responsible for reimbursing the landlord the full cost of the carpet clean, only a portion relative to the size of the lounge.

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 claims the tenant is responsible for the following damage: a. Removal of wallpaper b. Holes in internal doors c. Dent in garage roller door
I deal with each matter in turn below. Removal of wallpaper
The landlord provided photographs of the property taken at the beginning of the tenancy, which show the wallpaper on the walls intact. The landlord provided photographs of the property taken at the end of the tenancy which show small - moderate pieces of wallpaper have been removed. Two of these photographs are of the bottom of the walls where the wallpaper has been removed. One of the photographs is around the middle of the wall where the wallpaper has been removed.
The wallpaper appears old in the photographs taken at the beginning of the tenancy. This tenancy was six years long. For these reasons, I consider the removal of two small – moderate amounts of wallpaper at the bottom of the walls to be fair wear and tear. In contrast, I consider the photograph showing the removal of wallpaper in the middle of the wall to be careless damage. There are two small holes in the wall, which suggests the tenant hung something on the wall and the wallpaper has been ripped off when removing it.
The landlord provided an invoice for $345.00 (including GST) to repair the wallpaper. Considering my finding that the tenant is only responsible for the removal of wallpaper in the middle of the wall, I have granted the landlord’s claim for compensation for an adjusted amount of $172.50. Holes in doors
The landlord provided photographs of the property taken at the beginning of the tenancy which show no holes in the internal doors. The landlord provided photographs of the property taken at the end of the tenancy which show holes in some internal doors.
Based on the photographs provided by the landlord, I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the internal doors were damaged during the tenancy. The damage is more than fair wear and tear and the tenant has not disproved liability.
The landlord provided an invoice to repair the internal doors for $345.00 (including GST). Their claim for compensation for this amount is granted in full. Garage door
The landlord provided a photograph of the garage roller door taken at the beginning of the tenancy. No damage is apparent. The landlord provided a photograph of the garage roller door taken at the end of the tenancy, which shows a significant dent. The landlord also provided text message sent by the tenant to the landlord stating that Kahla Hotene drove her car into the garage door.
I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the garage door was damaged during the tenancy. The damage is more than fair wear and tear and the tenant has not disproved liability.
The landlord provided confirmation from their insurer that their claim to repair the garage door was accepted and their excess was $500.00. The landlord’s claim for compensation for this amount is granted in full.
All of the amounts ordered above are proved.
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. Filing fee
Because [The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4926756 — net $1,915.85 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 23 June 2024	$3,171.43	Rent arrears to 23 June 2024
Water rates	$226.92	Water rates
Cleaning	$200.00	Cleaning
Carpet Cleaning	$100.00	Carpet Cleaning
Insurance excess for garage door	$500.00	Insurance excess for garage door
Repair wallpaper	$172.50	Repair wallpaper
Repair doors	$345.00	Repair doors
Net award	$1,915.85
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,915.85

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name and identifying details.
Kahla Loiuse Hotene and Peter John Tekotia must pay [The landlord/s] $1,448.35 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,800.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
As the applicant, the landlord must prove their claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

The tenancy ended on 23 June 2024. The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amounts owing at the end of the tenancy. Rent arrears were $3,171.43 and outstanding water rates were $226.92.

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 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 landlord claims the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and seeks compensation as follows: a. General cleaning: $575.00 (including GST) b. Carpet cleaning: $207.00 (including GST)
The landlord provided invoices for the above amounts.
I deal with each matter in turn below. General cleaning
The landlord provided photographs of the property taken at the end of the tenancy. These photographs are relatively few and mainly close-up shots of specific areas the landlord claims the tenant did not clean. For example, the landlord provided photographs of the top of the rangehood, toilet, blinds and one wall with spillage on it. Based on these photographs, I do not consider that the landlord has proven that the tenant left the entire property in an unreasonably clean and tidy state, only those areas shown in the photographs. The landlord would do better in the future to take photographs of each room from a wide angle to assist the Tribunal in determining the overall state the property was left at the end of the tenancy.
I have granted the landlord’s claim for an adjusted amount of $200.00. The Tribunal sees numerous applications for compensation for cleaning. The general hourly rate is $50.00. Based on the photographs provided by the landlord, I do not consider that more than 4 hours of cleaning would have been required to bring this property to a reasonably clean and tidy standard. Carpet cleaning
The landlord provided photographs of the carpet in the lounge taken at the beginning of the tenancy. It is clean and no marks or stains are present. The landlord provided photographs of the carpet in the lounge taken at the end of the tenancy. Marks and stains are present. Based on the photographs provided by the landlord, I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the tenant is responsible for the marks and stains on the carpet in the lounge. I accept that the carpet in the lounge needed to be professionally cleaned to bring the property to a reasonably clean and tidy standard.
The landlord’s claim for compensation for carpet cleaning is granted for an adjusted amount of $100.00. This reflects the fact that the landlord had the entire carpet throughout the property professionally cleaned. The landlord has only proven that the carpet in the lounge needed to be professionally cleaned. The tenant is not responsible for reimbursing the landlord the full cost of the carpet clean, only a portion relative to the size of the lounge.

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 claims the tenant is responsible for the following damage: a. Removal of wallpaper b. Holes in internal doors c. Dent in garage roller door
I deal with each matter in turn below. Removal of wallpaper
The landlord provided photographs of the property taken at the beginning of the tenancy, which show the wallpaper on the walls intact. The landlord provided photographs of the property taken at the end of the tenancy which show small - moderate pieces of wallpaper have been removed. Two of these photographs are of the bottom of the walls where the wallpaper has been removed. One of the photographs is around the middle of the wall where the wallpaper has been removed.
The wallpaper appears old in the photographs taken at the beginning of the tenancy. This tenancy was six years long. For these reasons, I consider the removal of two small – moderate amounts of wallpaper at the bottom of the walls to be fair wear and tear. In contrast, I consider the photograph showing the removal of wallpaper in the middle of the wall to be careless damage. There are two small holes in the wall, which suggests the tenant hung something on the wall and the wallpaper has been ripped off when removing it.
The landlord provided an invoice for $345.00 (including GST) to repair the wallpaper. Considering my finding that the tenant is only responsible for the removal of wallpaper in the middle of the wall, I have granted the landlord’s claim for compensation for an adjusted amount of $172.50. Holes in doors
The landlord provided photographs of the property taken at the beginning of the tenancy which show no holes in the internal doors. The landlord provided photographs of the property taken at the end of the tenancy which show holes in some internal doors.
Based on the photographs provided by the landlord, I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the internal doors were damaged during the tenancy. The damage is more than fair wear and tear and the tenant has not disproved liability.
The landlord provided an invoice to repair the internal doors for $345.00 (including GST). Their claim for compensation for this amount is granted in full. Garage door
The landlord provided a photograph of the garage roller door taken at the beginning of the tenancy. No damage is apparent. The landlord provided a photograph of the garage roller door taken at the end of the tenancy, which shows a significant dent. The landlord also provided text message sent by the tenant to the landlord stating that Kahla Hotene drove her car into the garage door.
I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the garage door was damaged during the tenancy. The damage is more than fair wear and tear and the tenant has not disproved liability.
The landlord provided confirmation from their insurer that their claim to repair the garage door was accepted and their excess was $500.00. The landlord’s claim for compensation for this amount is granted in full.
All of the amounts ordered above are proved.
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. Filing fee
Because [The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4926756 — Rent arrears at 124 Carnoustie Drive, Wattle Downs, Auckland 2103

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4926756 — Rent arrears at 124 Carnoustie Drive, Wattle Downs, Auckland 2103

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent 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

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent 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

Frequently asked questions