What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4947257 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 4947257?

address suppressed] is reduced and n…: $3,700.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4947257?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4947257?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11254250-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4947257 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 4947257?

address suppressed] is reduced and n…: $3,700.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4947257?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4947257?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11254250-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4947257 — Cleanliness

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4947257. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
address suppressed] is reduced and now ends at 11:59pm on 21 July 2024. 3. [The tenant/s] owes [The respondent/s] compen	$3,700.00		address suppressed] is reduced and now ends at 11:59pm on 21 July 2024. 3. [The tenant/s] owes [The respondent/s] compen

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s and landlord’s name and identifying details.
The term of the fixed-term tenancy of [The tenant/s] at [Tenancy address suppressed] is reduced and now ends at 11:59pm on 21 July 2024.
[The tenant/s] owes [The respondent/s] compensation of $3,700.00 to be paid from the bond held by [The respondent/s].

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenant has applied for a reduction of a fixed term tenancy, refund of the bond, compensation, damages, and refund of the application fee. Background
The tenant signed a fixed term tenancy agreement that commenced on 8 March 2024 and was to end on 7 March 2025.
On 11 July 2024 the tenant advised the landlord that she had an emergency and had to return to India. No further information was provided on the what the specific emergency was.
The tenant recommended a replacement tenant, “Jade”, to the landlord, who the landlord understood to be a friend of the tenants.
The landlord advised the tenant that as she is in a fixed-term tenancy, she would need to pay the rent until they could find a replacement tenant.
The tenant sent the landlord a rental agreement, that was completed with Jade’s details as the new tenant and signed by Jade. The landlord advises that this was a surprise as usually they like to carry out background checks and provide a rental agreement to a prospective tenant for consideration. However, as they wanted to assist the tenant to leave the fixed term tenancy, they proceeded to verify Jade.
At some stage an arrangement was made that if Jade was to move in, she would do so on 21 July 2024 and the tenant would vacate on the same day.
On 16 July 2024 the landlord sent Jade a partially signed rental agreement, partial in the sense that only one of the named landlords had signed it. The landlord advises that he did this to reassure the tenant that they were trying to find a replacement tenant so that the tenant could leave and take care of her emergency. The landlord advises that they were not comfortable with Jade as a tenant and had only managed to speak to her once on the phone, however, they felt pressure from the tenant to sign her and so they proceeded on that basis. The proposed tenancy agreement required bond and one week rent in advance to be paid.
On 21 July 2024 the tenant moved out of the property and the keys were collected by the landlord. At this stage, Jade had ceased communications with the landlord and had failed to pay any bond or rent in advance.
On 22 July 2024 the landlord advised the tenant that since Jade had ceased communications and not paid any bond, or rent in advanced, or moved into the property – they would continue their search for a suitable tenant.
A final inspection was held with the tenant at the property, where the landlord identified some issues. These issues created conflict between the parties, and several WhatsApp message exchanges have been provided.
Eventually the landlord asked that any further correspondence be through email rather than WhatsApp, and communications ceased.
On 20 August 2024 a new tenant moved into the property. This was four weeks and two days after the tenant moved out of the property. Reduction of the fixed term tenancy
The tenant has applied for reduction of the fixed-term tenancy due to end on 7 March 2025.
It is only in limited circumstances that a court or tribunal will interfere with a fixed-term tenancy. For residential tenancies, one of those circumstances is found in s66 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), which allows for the reduction of fixed-term tenancy agreements.
There is a high threshold to be met before the Tribunal will reduce the term. In particular, the tenant will need to establish: a. there has been a change in the applicant’s circumstances; and b. the change was unforeseen; and c. there would be severe hardship to the applicant if the term is not reduced; and d. the applicant’s hardship would be greater than the hardship to the other party if the term is reduced. See section 66(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The tenant was required to urgently return to India as her father had advised that her grandfather was gravely ill and didn’t have much time left. He has since passed away. I am satisfied that there has been an unforeseen change in the tenant's circumstances.
The tenant would suffer severe hardship if the term of the tenancy were not reduced. The tenant was unable to return to India and continue to pay rent at the property. As it happened, the tenant required the bond money held to pay for the return flights to India. As she did not receive the bond money in time, she was unable to return, and did not see her grandfather before he passed. She advises that she has been staying with friends and has since commenced a new tenancy – where she will need to pay rent. Obviously, she is unable to pay two rents and it would cause severe hardship if she was required to.
The landlord did suffer hardship in the process of trying to find a replacement tenant, however, and although they had to reduce the rent to secure a tenant, a new tenant has been in the property since 20 August 2024.
I find that the tenant’s hardship would be greater than the landlord’s hardship.
The fixed-term tenancy is therefore reduced to 21 July 2024.
Although the tenancy agreement with Jade was proposed by the tenant, no bond was paid, there was no meeting on site and although the tenant may have thought Jade was a viable replacement option, I am not satisfied from the documents and evidence I have heard that Jade ever intended to move into the property.
The landlords have sought to mitigate their losses by finding a replacement tenant and reducing the rent to do so and have found a new tenant relatively fast.
Where the Tribunal reduces a fixed-term tenancy, it may order the tenant to pay the landlord reasonable compensation for any resulting loss. See section 66(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
I award compensation of four weeks rent amounting to $3,700.00 to the landlord, considering the losses they have suffered because of the reduction in the fixed term tenancy. I note that the losses suffered could have been considerably more if the landlords had not acted so fast to find a replacement tenant.
The amount of $3,700.00 is the exact amount of bond held by the landlords.

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 has claimed for additional costs of $280.00 for carpet cleaning.
Evidence was given at the hearing that the tenant had moved in quickly and the premises were not clean and tidy at the commencement of the tenant. The tenant had carried out significant cleaning as a result. The landlord accepted this. The tenant advised that they had cleaned the premises prior to vacating, and that it was clean and tidy, and they provided photographs of the cleanliness.
In addition, and as discussed at the hearing, there is no ability for a landlord to require that professional carpet cleaning be carried out at the end of every tenancy. What is required pursuant to the RTA is that the premises are reasonably clean and tidy.
I am satisfied that the premises were clean and tidy and any claim for carpet cleaning costs is dismissed.
The tenant requested name suppression on their application and at the hearing the landlord had also sought name suppression. As both parties have had some level of success and there is personal information included in the decision, I have granted name suppression to both parties. R Harvey-Lane 23 December 2024

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4947257. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
address suppressed] is reduced and now ends at 11:59pm on 21 July 2024. 3. [The tenant/s] owes [The respondent/s] compen	$3,700.00		address suppressed] is reduced and now ends at 11:59pm on 21 July 2024. 3. [The tenant/s] owes [The respondent/s] compen

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s and landlord’s name and identifying details.
The term of the fixed-term tenancy of [The tenant/s] at [Tenancy address suppressed] is reduced and now ends at 11:59pm on 21 July 2024.
[The tenant/s] owes [The respondent/s] compensation of $3,700.00 to be paid from the bond held by [The respondent/s].

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenant has applied for a reduction of a fixed term tenancy, refund of the bond, compensation, damages, and refund of the application fee. Background
The tenant signed a fixed term tenancy agreement that commenced on 8 March 2024 and was to end on 7 March 2025.
On 11 July 2024 the tenant advised the landlord that she had an emergency and had to return to India. No further information was provided on the what the specific emergency was.
The tenant recommended a replacement tenant, “Jade”, to the landlord, who the landlord understood to be a friend of the tenants.
The landlord advised the tenant that as she is in a fixed-term tenancy, she would need to pay the rent until they could find a replacement tenant.
The tenant sent the landlord a rental agreement, that was completed with Jade’s details as the new tenant and signed by Jade. The landlord advises that this was a surprise as usually they like to carry out background checks and provide a rental agreement to a prospective tenant for consideration. However, as they wanted to assist the tenant to leave the fixed term tenancy, they proceeded to verify Jade.
At some stage an arrangement was made that if Jade was to move in, she would do so on 21 July 2024 and the tenant would vacate on the same day.
On 16 July 2024 the landlord sent Jade a partially signed rental agreement, partial in the sense that only one of the named landlords had signed it. The landlord advises that he did this to reassure the tenant that they were trying to find a replacement tenant so that the tenant could leave and take care of her emergency. The landlord advises that they were not comfortable with Jade as a tenant and had only managed to speak to her once on the phone, however, they felt pressure from the tenant to sign her and so they proceeded on that basis. The proposed tenancy agreement required bond and one week rent in advance to be paid.
On 21 July 2024 the tenant moved out of the property and the keys were collected by the landlord. At this stage, Jade had ceased communications with the landlord and had failed to pay any bond or rent in advance.
On 22 July 2024 the landlord advised the tenant that since Jade had ceased communications and not paid any bond, or rent in advanced, or moved into the property – they would continue their search for a suitable tenant.
A final inspection was held with the tenant at the property, where the landlord identified some issues. These issues created conflict between the parties, and several WhatsApp message exchanges have been provided.
Eventually the landlord asked that any further correspondence be through email rather than WhatsApp, and communications ceased.
On 20 August 2024 a new tenant moved into the property. This was four weeks and two days after the tenant moved out of the property. Reduction of the fixed term tenancy
The tenant has applied for reduction of the fixed-term tenancy due to end on 7 March 2025.
It is only in limited circumstances that a court or tribunal will interfere with a fixed-term tenancy. For residential tenancies, one of those circumstances is found in s66 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), which allows for the reduction of fixed-term tenancy agreements.
There is a high threshold to be met before the Tribunal will reduce the term. In particular, the tenant will need to establish: a. there has been a change in the applicant’s circumstances; and b. the change was unforeseen; and c. there would be severe hardship to the applicant if the term is not reduced; and d. the applicant’s hardship would be greater than the hardship to the other party if the term is reduced. See section 66(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The tenant was required to urgently return to India as her father had advised that her grandfather was gravely ill and didn’t have much time left. He has since passed away. I am satisfied that there has been an unforeseen change in the tenant's circumstances.
The tenant would suffer severe hardship if the term of the tenancy were not reduced. The tenant was unable to return to India and continue to pay rent at the property. As it happened, the tenant required the bond money held to pay for the return flights to India. As she did not receive the bond money in time, she was unable to return, and did not see her grandfather before he passed. She advises that she has been staying with friends and has since commenced a new tenancy – where she will need to pay rent. Obviously, she is unable to pay two rents and it would cause severe hardship if she was required to.
The landlord did suffer hardship in the process of trying to find a replacement tenant, however, and although they had to reduce the rent to secure a tenant, a new tenant has been in the property since 20 August 2024.
I find that the tenant’s hardship would be greater than the landlord’s hardship.
The fixed-term tenancy is therefore reduced to 21 July 2024.
Although the tenancy agreement with Jade was proposed by the tenant, no bond was paid, there was no meeting on site and although the tenant may have thought Jade was a viable replacement option, I am not satisfied from the documents and evidence I have heard that Jade ever intended to move into the property.
The landlords have sought to mitigate their losses by finding a replacement tenant and reducing the rent to do so and have found a new tenant relatively fast.
Where the Tribunal reduces a fixed-term tenancy, it may order the tenant to pay the landlord reasonable compensation for any resulting loss. See section 66(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
I award compensation of four weeks rent amounting to $3,700.00 to the landlord, considering the losses they have suffered because of the reduction in the fixed term tenancy. I note that the losses suffered could have been considerably more if the landlords had not acted so fast to find a replacement tenant.
The amount of $3,700.00 is the exact amount of bond held by the landlords.

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 has claimed for additional costs of $280.00 for carpet cleaning.
Evidence was given at the hearing that the tenant had moved in quickly and the premises were not clean and tidy at the commencement of the tenant. The tenant had carried out significant cleaning as a result. The landlord accepted this. The tenant advised that they had cleaned the premises prior to vacating, and that it was clean and tidy, and they provided photographs of the cleanliness.
In addition, and as discussed at the hearing, there is no ability for a landlord to require that professional carpet cleaning be carried out at the end of every tenancy. What is required pursuant to the RTA is that the premises are reasonably clean and tidy.
I am satisfied that the premises were clean and tidy and any claim for carpet cleaning costs is dismissed.
The tenant requested name suppression on their application and at the hearing the landlord had also sought name suppression. As both parties have had some level of success and there is personal information included in the decision, I have granted name suppression to both parties. R Harvey-Lane 23 December 2024

Tenancy Tribunal case 4947257 — Cleanliness

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4947257 — Cleanliness

At a glance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

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

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

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