What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4934713 about?

The tribunal order states: Carol Tuala and Solomone Tuala must pay [The landlord/s] $16,898.11

How much money was awarded in case 4934713?

Cleaning: $322.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $1,265.00 awarded to landlord; Door Frame Painting: $1,360.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Internal Painting Of Property: $3,400.00 awarded to landlord; Lightbulbs: $180.00 awarded to landlord; Painting Back Unit: $360.00 awarded to landlord; Pest Control: $460.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $860.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $300.00 awarded to landlord; Remove Pet Odour: $180.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $9,308.57 awarded to landlord; Aluminium Door: $210.00 awarded to landlord; By Consent Shower Door: $120.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings Curtains: $720.00 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: Six door stoppe…: $75.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $254.01 awarded to landlord; Toilet Paper Holder: $60.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $536.53 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $300.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4934713?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4934713?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10975151-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4934713 about?

The tribunal order states: Carol Tuala and Solomone Tuala must pay [The landlord/s] $16,898.11

How much money was awarded in case 4934713?

Cleaning: $322.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $1,265.00 awarded to landlord; Door Frame Painting: $1,360.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Internal Painting Of Property: $3,400.00 awarded to landlord; Lightbulbs: $180.00 awarded to landlord; Painting Back Unit: $360.00 awarded to landlord; Pest Control: $460.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $860.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $300.00 awarded to landlord; Remove Pet Odour: $180.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $9,308.57 awarded to landlord; Aluminium Door: $210.00 awarded to landlord; By Consent Shower Door: $120.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings Curtains: $720.00 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: Six door stoppe…: $75.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $254.01 awarded to landlord; Toilet Paper Holder: $60.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $536.53 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $300.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4934713?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4934713?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10975151-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4934713 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4934713 — net $16,898.11 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 11 July 2024	$9,308.57	2. The landlord has applied for rent arrears, water rates arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of t…
Water rates	$536.53	6. The Tenants agreed to pay the Landlords claims for the window-panes that were broken and the shower door repairs.
Repairs to wall and ceiling	$860.00	Repairs to wall and ceiling
Internal painting of property	$3,400.00	Internal painting of property
Painting back unit	$360.00	Painting back unit
Light bulbs	$180.00	Light bulbs
Lock/key replacement	$300.00	Lock/key replacement
Repairs: Aluminium door	$210.00	Repairs: Aluminium door
Replace furnishings: Six door stoppers	$75.00	Replace furnishings: Six door stoppers
Window repairs: by consent	$300.00	Window repairs: by consent
Rubbish removal	$254.01	Rubbish removal
Pest control	$460.00	Pest control
Carpet Cleaning	$322.00	Carpet Cleaning
Cleaning	$1,265.00	Cleaning
Repairs: By consent shower door	$120.00	Repairs: By consent shower door
Remove pet odour	$180.00	Remove pet odour
Door frame painting	$1,360.00	Door frame painting
Toilet paper holder	$60.00	Toilet paper holder
Replace furnishings curtains	$720.00	Replace furnishings curtains
__________________________________________________________________________________ 49347132 Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	__________________________________________________________________________________ 49347132 Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$16,898.11
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$16,898.11

Order

Carol Tuala and Solomone Tuala must pay [The landlord/s] $16,898.11 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,400.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, water rates arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The tenancy started on 23 April 2022 and ended on 11 July 2024. The Tenants moved out earlier than the date they had given notice to the Landlord that the tenancy would end. They had not moved out all of their personal items completely, when they returned to find the Landlord’s contractors had moved their remaining belongings out and were cleaning. They saw a flexi-bin outside the house with a lot of their belongings. The Tenant did not go into the house to ask the contractors what they were doing and did not contact the Landlord to confirm this either. They assumed the Landlord had moved them out of the property and was doing the cleaning of the property. The Tenants were not clear on the actual date that they moved out or the actual date when they returned to find the contractors in the house.
The Landlord submitted that they did not move their belongings out. The Landlord sent contractors in immediately after the Tenant told him they had vacated. This is because they had conducted a final inspection and the infestation of cockroaches, rats and fleas was alarming and unhygienic. The Tenant did not ask the Landlord’s contractors what they were doing in the property but just assumed the Landlord had moved all their belongings out and was cleaning the property themselves.
It is from this breakdown in communication that the Tenants thought that they could not go back into the property to clean it, make the repairs and remove the rest of their belongings. They submitted that they did not get this opportunity because the Landlord had done it. This was the grounds for their failure to clean, repair and for leave the property in the condition it was in at the end of the tenancy. They stated if they had been given time to go back in the property, they could have fixed all of these issues so they should not be liable for any of the landlord’s claims.
The Tenants agreed to pay the Landlords claims for the window-panes that were broken and the shower door repairs.

How much is owed for rent and water rates arrears?

The tenancy ended on 11 July 2024. The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy. The Tenants did not agree with the rent owing and said they had problems with paying rent because only one Tenant was working and his wife was at home looking after the children. They said the rent arrears was too high but admitted that they did not pay the rent all the time.
The Tenant’s also did not agree with the water rates because they said there was a leak at the property. They said they told the Landlord about the leak but nothing was done. They did not have evidence to support this.
Section 40(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act (1986) (“RTA”) says that the Tenant must pay rent on time when it is due. The law does not say that the Tribunal can consider the Tribunal’s financial situation before it makes an Order about rent arrears. The Tenant must also pay the water. If there was a leak, the Tenants need to bring their own application to the Tribunal if they believe there was a leak and they did not have any proof that there was a water leak.
I find it more likely than not that the amount owing was proved for the water rates and rent arrears based on the evidence the Landlord gave.
The amounts owing are proved.

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 tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish because they were not given an opportunity to do so by the Tenant. The Landlord provided invoices for the cleaning and rubbish removal.
In considering the evidence regarding the cleaning and the rubbish, I do not accept the Tenants excuse that they were not given a chance by the Landlord to clean. The Tenant should have asked the Landlord what the contractors were doing in the property when he returned the day after vacating, instead of assuming they were doing the cleaning for them.
A Tenant is responsible for leaving the property reasonably clean and tidy when they move out (Section 40(1)( e) RTA). Because they did not attend to this, and have not provided a reasonable excuse, they are liable for the costs claimed by the Landlord.
The Landlord found an infestation of cockroaches, fleas and rats. They also found the carpet was stained with urine, food and liquid stains. There was a strong pet odour that needed to be removed. The Landlord provided ingoing, outgoing inspection reports and invoices to prove the amount’s claimed.
The Tenants did not agree with the claim for pet odour because they did not have a pet. The Landlord stated they were very experienced from years as a Property Manager in noticing the different types of odours. They knew exactly what pet odour smelt like as opposed to other odours They provided an invoice which showed the cleaner charged for removing ‘pet odour’.
I find in considering the evidence, the Landlord had an invoice from a professional cleaner that stated the removal of ‘pet odour’. They also had inspection reports which noted the infestation of pests carpet stains and an invoice for fumigating.
The amounts ordered are proved.
The tenant did not return the keys so the locks needed to be changed. An invoice was provided for this change.
The landlord had to replace light bulbs, toilet paper holder and door stoppers. The Landlord provided an invoice and inspection reports to prove these were missing.
The Tenants advised the toilet paper holder easily broke off but they did not have evidence to show that they told the Landlord at the time that this was damaged. A Tenant must report damage to the Landlord as soon as possible so the Landlord can repair it. The Tenant had no evidence that they did so. (Section 40(1)(d) RTA). As the Tenant did not have this proof, I find the Tenant must pay for replacements.
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 careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.
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 following damage was caused during the tenancy: wall damage from drawings and holes, curtain damage and door frame damage. I find the damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. In terms of the painting to the walls, I have limited this to $3400.00 which is four weeks rent rather than $3800.00 as claimed, as I consider this careless damage.
The amounts ordered 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.
As the Landlord has been substantially successful, name suppression is granted and the Tenant shall pay the filing fee.
As the Tenants have not been successful, name suppression has not been granted.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4934713 — net $16,898.11 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 11 July 2024	$9,308.57	2. The landlord has applied for rent arrears, water rates arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of t…
Water rates	$536.53	6. The Tenants agreed to pay the Landlords claims for the window-panes that were broken and the shower door repairs.
Repairs to wall and ceiling	$860.00	Repairs to wall and ceiling
Internal painting of property	$3,400.00	Internal painting of property
Painting back unit	$360.00	Painting back unit
Light bulbs	$180.00	Light bulbs
Lock/key replacement	$300.00	Lock/key replacement
Repairs: Aluminium door	$210.00	Repairs: Aluminium door
Replace furnishings: Six door stoppers	$75.00	Replace furnishings: Six door stoppers
Window repairs: by consent	$300.00	Window repairs: by consent
Rubbish removal	$254.01	Rubbish removal
Pest control	$460.00	Pest control
Carpet Cleaning	$322.00	Carpet Cleaning
Cleaning	$1,265.00	Cleaning
Repairs: By consent shower door	$120.00	Repairs: By consent shower door
Remove pet odour	$180.00	Remove pet odour
Door frame painting	$1,360.00	Door frame painting
Toilet paper holder	$60.00	Toilet paper holder
Replace furnishings curtains	$720.00	Replace furnishings curtains
__________________________________________________________________________________ 49347132 Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	__________________________________________________________________________________ 49347132 Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$16,898.11
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$16,898.11

Order

Carol Tuala and Solomone Tuala must pay [The landlord/s] $16,898.11 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,400.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, water rates arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The tenancy started on 23 April 2022 and ended on 11 July 2024. The Tenants moved out earlier than the date they had given notice to the Landlord that the tenancy would end. They had not moved out all of their personal items completely, when they returned to find the Landlord’s contractors had moved their remaining belongings out and were cleaning. They saw a flexi-bin outside the house with a lot of their belongings. The Tenant did not go into the house to ask the contractors what they were doing and did not contact the Landlord to confirm this either. They assumed the Landlord had moved them out of the property and was doing the cleaning of the property. The Tenants were not clear on the actual date that they moved out or the actual date when they returned to find the contractors in the house.
The Landlord submitted that they did not move their belongings out. The Landlord sent contractors in immediately after the Tenant told him they had vacated. This is because they had conducted a final inspection and the infestation of cockroaches, rats and fleas was alarming and unhygienic. The Tenant did not ask the Landlord’s contractors what they were doing in the property but just assumed the Landlord had moved all their belongings out and was cleaning the property themselves.
It is from this breakdown in communication that the Tenants thought that they could not go back into the property to clean it, make the repairs and remove the rest of their belongings. They submitted that they did not get this opportunity because the Landlord had done it. This was the grounds for their failure to clean, repair and for leave the property in the condition it was in at the end of the tenancy. They stated if they had been given time to go back in the property, they could have fixed all of these issues so they should not be liable for any of the landlord’s claims.
The Tenants agreed to pay the Landlords claims for the window-panes that were broken and the shower door repairs.

How much is owed for rent and water rates arrears?

The tenancy ended on 11 July 2024. The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy. The Tenants did not agree with the rent owing and said they had problems with paying rent because only one Tenant was working and his wife was at home looking after the children. They said the rent arrears was too high but admitted that they did not pay the rent all the time.
The Tenant’s also did not agree with the water rates because they said there was a leak at the property. They said they told the Landlord about the leak but nothing was done. They did not have evidence to support this.
Section 40(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act (1986) (“RTA”) says that the Tenant must pay rent on time when it is due. The law does not say that the Tribunal can consider the Tribunal’s financial situation before it makes an Order about rent arrears. The Tenant must also pay the water. If there was a leak, the Tenants need to bring their own application to the Tribunal if they believe there was a leak and they did not have any proof that there was a water leak.
I find it more likely than not that the amount owing was proved for the water rates and rent arrears based on the evidence the Landlord gave.
The amounts owing are proved.

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 tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish because they were not given an opportunity to do so by the Tenant. The Landlord provided invoices for the cleaning and rubbish removal.
In considering the evidence regarding the cleaning and the rubbish, I do not accept the Tenants excuse that they were not given a chance by the Landlord to clean. The Tenant should have asked the Landlord what the contractors were doing in the property when he returned the day after vacating, instead of assuming they were doing the cleaning for them.
A Tenant is responsible for leaving the property reasonably clean and tidy when they move out (Section 40(1)( e) RTA). Because they did not attend to this, and have not provided a reasonable excuse, they are liable for the costs claimed by the Landlord.
The Landlord found an infestation of cockroaches, fleas and rats. They also found the carpet was stained with urine, food and liquid stains. There was a strong pet odour that needed to be removed. The Landlord provided ingoing, outgoing inspection reports and invoices to prove the amount’s claimed.
The Tenants did not agree with the claim for pet odour because they did not have a pet. The Landlord stated they were very experienced from years as a Property Manager in noticing the different types of odours. They knew exactly what pet odour smelt like as opposed to other odours They provided an invoice which showed the cleaner charged for removing ‘pet odour’.
I find in considering the evidence, the Landlord had an invoice from a professional cleaner that stated the removal of ‘pet odour’. They also had inspection reports which noted the infestation of pests carpet stains and an invoice for fumigating.
The amounts ordered are proved.
The tenant did not return the keys so the locks needed to be changed. An invoice was provided for this change.
The landlord had to replace light bulbs, toilet paper holder and door stoppers. The Landlord provided an invoice and inspection reports to prove these were missing.
The Tenants advised the toilet paper holder easily broke off but they did not have evidence to show that they told the Landlord at the time that this was damaged. A Tenant must report damage to the Landlord as soon as possible so the Landlord can repair it. The Tenant had no evidence that they did so. (Section 40(1)(d) RTA). As the Tenant did not have this proof, I find the Tenant must pay for replacements.
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 careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.
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 following damage was caused during the tenancy: wall damage from drawings and holes, curtain damage and door frame damage. I find the damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. In terms of the painting to the walls, I have limited this to $3400.00 which is four weeks rent rather than $3800.00 as claimed, as I consider this careless damage.
The amounts ordered 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.
As the Landlord has been substantially successful, name suppression is granted and the Tenant shall pay the filing fee.
As the Tenants have not been successful, name suppression has not been granted.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4934713 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4934713 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent and water rates arrears?

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 arrears?

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