What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4961493 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 4961493?

Compensation: $570.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,857.14 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4961493?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4961493?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11732840-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4961493 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 4961493?

Compensation: $570.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,857.14 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4961493?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4961493?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11732840-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4961493 — Rent arrears

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4961493 — net $2,454.14 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$1,857.14	Rent arrears
Compensation for breaking fixed term	$570.00	Compensation for breaking fixed term
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,454.14
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,454.14

Only the landlord attended the hearing. The tenants have appeared at prior hearings but none of them responded to telephone calls.

The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Since the prior hearings, the tenants have agreed to release of the bond to the landlord and so the amount sought for rent has now reduced, as is ordered above.

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.

I am satisfied that repairs were necessary to holes in the wall and a cupboard. The landlord was initially also claiming for the cost of a broken door handle but is no longer.

I order payment of the sums referred to above to effect these repairs. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The landlord also claims for costs incurred following the tenants wanting to break the fixed term. The tenants agreed to pay $570 for that cost. Based on the information supplied to me, that sum in fact exceeds the amount incurred by the landlord, when the cost of viewings is taken into account.

I consider the sum ordered above to be a reasonably foreseeable amount incurred by the landlord as a result of the tenants breaking their fixed term.

Because [The landlord/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee. I also consider this a suitable case for name suppression of the landlord, for that reason.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4961493 — net $2,454.14 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$1,857.14	Rent arrears
Compensation for breaking fixed term	$570.00	Compensation for breaking fixed term
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,454.14
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,454.14

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name and identifying details.
Jb John Esparas Capanas, Mark Anthony Galvez Gonzales and Meji Duyo must pay [The landlord/s] $2454.14 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

Only the landlord attended the hearing. The tenants have appeared at prior hearings but none of them responded to telephone calls.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Since the prior hearings, the tenants have agreed to release of the bond to the landlord and so the amount sought for rent has now reduced, as is ordered above.

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.
I am satisfied that repairs were necessary to holes in the wall and a cupboard. The landlord was initially also claiming for the cost of a broken door handle but is no longer.
I order payment of the sums referred to above to effect these repairs. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord also claims for costs incurred following the tenants wanting to break the fixed term. The tenants agreed to pay $570 for that cost. Based on the information supplied to me, that sum in fact exceeds the amount incurred by the landlord, when the cost of viewings is taken into account.
I consider the sum ordered above to be a reasonably foreseeable amount incurred by the landlord as a result of the tenants breaking their fixed term.
Because [The landlord/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee. I also consider this a suitable case for name suppression of the landlord, for that reason.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4961493 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4961493 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions