What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4967514 about?

The tribunal order states: 2. This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 11 June 2024 under

How much money was awarded in case 4967514?

Cleaning: $250.00 awarded to landlord; Eviction Fee: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Heat Pump Remote: $59.00 awarded to landlord; Lightbulbs: $38.86 awarded to landlord; Missing Door Downstairs Bedroom: $410.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 4871700 D…: $2,786.29 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $2,740.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,514.28 awarded to landlord; Replace Pavers Driveway: $280.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $550.00 awarded to landlord; Walls and Doors: $2,587.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4967514?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4967514?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11161077-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4967514 about?

The tribunal order states: 2. This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 11 June 2024 under

How much money was awarded in case 4967514?

Cleaning: $250.00 awarded to landlord; Eviction Fee: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Heat Pump Remote: $59.00 awarded to landlord; Lightbulbs: $38.86 awarded to landlord; Missing Door Downstairs Bedroom: $410.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 4871700 D…: $2,786.29 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $2,740.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,514.28 awarded to landlord; Replace Pavers Driveway: $280.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $550.00 awarded to landlord; Walls and Doors: $2,587.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4967514?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4967514?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11161077-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

3 Queenwood Avenue, Queenwood, Hamilton 3210 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4967514 — Property damage

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4967514. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears 18 June 2024 to 07 July 2024	$2,514.28	Rent arrears 18 June 2024 to 07 July 2024
Previous order application 4871700 dated 11/06/2024	$2,786.29	Previous order application 4871700 dated 11/06/2024
Carpet Cleaning	$250.00	Carpet Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$550.00	Rubbish removal
Light bulbs/batteries	$38.86	Light bulbs/batteries
Missing door downstairs bedroom	$410.00	Missing door downstairs bedroom
Heat pump remote	$59.00	Heat pump remote
Replace pavers driveway	$280.00	Replace pavers driveway
Repairs walls and doors	$2,587.50	Repairs walls and doors
Window repairs	$2,740.00	Window repairs
Eviction fee	$200.00	Eviction fee
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement

Order

This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 11 June 2024 under application NZTT 4871700

Reasons

[ Redacted] appeared for the landlord supported by Mr Andy. There was no appearance by the tenant.
The tenancy was terminated by the Tribunal for rent arrears on 11 June 2024, effective 17 June 2024. The Tribunal awarded rent arrears, ordered refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee. On 09 August 2024, the landlord filed a claim for further rent, compensation, and damage.
The onus of proving these claims rests with the landlord. The standard required is on the balance of probabilities. The landlord must establish more likely than not that the tenant has breached the terms of the agreement or provisions of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (The “Act”). How much is owed for rent.
The tenancy ended on 17 June 2024. The tenant did not vacate the property immediately. Although the landlord obtained an eviction notice, the tenant left voluntarily on 07 July 2024. The landlord is claiming the rent from 18 June 2024 to 07 July 2024, along with the eviction fee. The landlord provided rent records and an invoice for the eviction fee. No further rent payments were made by the tenant. The amounts ordered are proved.

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

The landlord claims that the tenant failed to leave the interior of the property reasonably clean, including the carpet, and remove all rubbish. The landlord is also claiming for missing chattels, light bulbs, and a heat pump remote.
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) of the Act.
What is reasonably clean, and tidy is not defined in the Act. The standard is based on what an average bystander would consider reasonable, not the subjective opinions of the landlord or tenant. In determining whether the tenant has failed to meet their obligations the Tribunal must evaluate the evidence available including inspection reports and photographs. In the case of older properties suffering wear and tear a before and after comparison might be necessary.
The property was constructed in the 1980s, consists of four bedrooms and two bathrooms. There is no pre tenancy inspection report. The landlord has produced photographs taken at the first inspection in October 2023. The property retains most of its original fixtures and fittings and shows signs of significant wear and tear. The landlord has produced an end of tenancy report which includes photographs of the property.
The end of tenancy photographs shows rubbish and other household items including furniture left by the tenant.
The photographs of the carpet taken in October 2024 show that the carpet throughout is stained and is in a poor condition. Although the landlord acknowledges the poor general condition, they state it had been professionally cleaned prior to the commencement of the tenancy and was clean. The agreement allowed the tenant to have dogs, evidence of which can be seen in inspection photographs from December 2023 and January 2024. [Redacted] states there was a strong animal odour present at the end of the tenancy.
The heat pump remote control noted as present in the January 2024 inspection report was missing at the end of the tenancy.
The end of tenancy report also shows nine missing standard light bulbs, and a missing heat lamp in one of the bathrooms.
Based on the evidence, I am satisfied that the tenant has failed to remove all rubbish, leave the carpet in a reasonably clean condition, and account for missing chattels, namely the heat pump remote and the light and heat lamp bulbs.
The Tribunal awards $550.00 for rubbish removal, which includes disposal fees, $250.00 to clean the carpet, $59.00 to replace the heat pump remote, and $38.86 to replace the bulbs (9 x $2.25, 1 x $19.61).
However, regarding the general cleaning, there is insufficient evidence to objectively determine whether the property is any cleaner or dirtier than it was at the commencement of the tenancy.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The landlord claims that the tenant is liable for damage to windows, walls and doors, a section of the driveway, and two power sockets.
To succeed with a claim for damage the landlord must prove that damage 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 of the Act.
Fair wear and tear can be described as damage which might reasonably be expected to naturally occur over time, such as the deterioration or gradual wear occurring with everyday use. See Taylor v Webb [1937] 2KB 283 (CA).
Where the damage is careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B of the Act 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) of the Act.
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) of the Act.
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.
In dealing with the issue of carelessness the question is whether the tenant was exercising a degree of care and attention that a reasonable and prudent tenant would exercise in the circumstances. The test is objective and not based on the subjective opinion of the tenant or landlord.
In awarding compensation for damage, the Tribunal must also consider 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, the Tribunal must consider the age and condition of the items concerned at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Windows
The landlord is claiming that the tenant is responsible for fourteen broken windows throughout the property, including glass panels in two ranch sliders. The landlord claims this is damage that has occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear.
Reviewing the inspection reports and photographs there are twelve windows that have clearly been damaged. I am satisfied that the damage has occurred during the tenancy and that it is more than fair wear and tear.
The total claim for window repair is $3,200.00. The invoice is not itemised. The average cost of repairing each window is approximately $230.00. I reduce the claim by $460.00 and award the landlord $2,740.00. Walls and doors
The landlord is claiming $2,587.50 to repair damage to walls and doors. The end of tenancy photographs shows fifteen areas of discrete damage to walls and doors throughout the property. The tenancy report from October 2023 shows some pre-existing damage to walls and doors. The landlord states that this claim is for damage over and above that already present. The damage consists of small to medium sized holes, some of which the tenant has attempted to repair.
I am satisfied that the damage has occurred during the tenancy and that it is more than fair wear and tear.
The landlord states only the damaged areas were repaired, and that there has been no betterment. I accept that submission. The amount claimed is awarded in full.
A door to a downstairs bedroom is missing. I am satisfied that this is damage occurring during the tenancy which is more than fair wear and tear. The landlord is claiming $410.00 to replace the door, which includes the cost of the door, the door handle, installation, and painting. I award the amount claimed and make no deduction for betterment. Driveway
The driveway includes a paved parking area. There are gaps between the pavers where grass grows. The end of tenancy photographs show that these pavers have been removed and stacked against a nearby fence, on the deck, and in a cupboard inside the house. The landlord states they challenged the tenant during an inspection and were told that the tenant had removed them because they preferred lawn, but that the pavers would be replaced at the end of the tenancy. They were not. The landlord is seeking $280.00 to re-lay the pavers. This is reasonable and awarded in full.
There is no evidence concerning the damaged power sockets, and that claim is dismissed. Other
On 11 June 2024, the Tribunal made an order relating to this tenancy, for termination and rent arrears. The previous order is incorporated into this order for enforcement purposes. Costs
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. Name suppression.
The landlord seeks name suppression.
Section 95A of the Act provides that on the application of a party that has been wholly or substantially successful in proceedings, the Tribunal must order that the name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that it is in the public interest to publish the names of the parties, or is justified because of the parties’ conduct, or any other circumstances of the case.
The landlord has been substantially successful in these proceedings and is granted name suppression.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4967514. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears 18 June 2024 to 07 July 2024	$2,514.28	Rent arrears 18 June 2024 to 07 July 2024
Previous order application 4871700 dated 11/06/2024	$2,786.29	Previous order application 4871700 dated 11/06/2024
Carpet Cleaning	$250.00	Carpet Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$550.00	Rubbish removal
Light bulbs/batteries	$38.86	Light bulbs/batteries
Missing door downstairs bedroom	$410.00	Missing door downstairs bedroom
Heat pump remote	$59.00	Heat pump remote
Replace pavers driveway	$280.00	Replace pavers driveway
Repairs walls and doors	$2,587.50	Repairs walls and doors
Window repairs	$2,740.00	Window repairs
Eviction fee	$200.00	Eviction fee
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement

Order

This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 11 June 2024 under application NZTT 4871700

Reasons

[ Redacted] appeared for the landlord supported by Mr Andy. There was no appearance by the tenant.
The tenancy was terminated by the Tribunal for rent arrears on 11 June 2024, effective 17 June 2024. The Tribunal awarded rent arrears, ordered refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee. On 09 August 2024, the landlord filed a claim for further rent, compensation, and damage.
The onus of proving these claims rests with the landlord. The standard required is on the balance of probabilities. The landlord must establish more likely than not that the tenant has breached the terms of the agreement or provisions of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (The “Act”). How much is owed for rent.
The tenancy ended on 17 June 2024. The tenant did not vacate the property immediately. Although the landlord obtained an eviction notice, the tenant left voluntarily on 07 July 2024. The landlord is claiming the rent from 18 June 2024 to 07 July 2024, along with the eviction fee. The landlord provided rent records and an invoice for the eviction fee. No further rent payments were made by the tenant. The amounts ordered are proved.

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

The landlord claims that the tenant failed to leave the interior of the property reasonably clean, including the carpet, and remove all rubbish. The landlord is also claiming for missing chattels, light bulbs, and a heat pump remote.
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) of the Act.
What is reasonably clean, and tidy is not defined in the Act. The standard is based on what an average bystander would consider reasonable, not the subjective opinions of the landlord or tenant. In determining whether the tenant has failed to meet their obligations the Tribunal must evaluate the evidence available including inspection reports and photographs. In the case of older properties suffering wear and tear a before and after comparison might be necessary.
The property was constructed in the 1980s, consists of four bedrooms and two bathrooms. There is no pre tenancy inspection report. The landlord has produced photographs taken at the first inspection in October 2023. The property retains most of its original fixtures and fittings and shows signs of significant wear and tear. The landlord has produced an end of tenancy report which includes photographs of the property.
The end of tenancy photographs shows rubbish and other household items including furniture left by the tenant.
The photographs of the carpet taken in October 2024 show that the carpet throughout is stained and is in a poor condition. Although the landlord acknowledges the poor general condition, they state it had been professionally cleaned prior to the commencement of the tenancy and was clean. The agreement allowed the tenant to have dogs, evidence of which can be seen in inspection photographs from December 2023 and January 2024. [Redacted] states there was a strong animal odour present at the end of the tenancy.
The heat pump remote control noted as present in the January 2024 inspection report was missing at the end of the tenancy.
The end of tenancy report also shows nine missing standard light bulbs, and a missing heat lamp in one of the bathrooms.
Based on the evidence, I am satisfied that the tenant has failed to remove all rubbish, leave the carpet in a reasonably clean condition, and account for missing chattels, namely the heat pump remote and the light and heat lamp bulbs.
The Tribunal awards $550.00 for rubbish removal, which includes disposal fees, $250.00 to clean the carpet, $59.00 to replace the heat pump remote, and $38.86 to replace the bulbs (9 x $2.25, 1 x $19.61).
However, regarding the general cleaning, there is insufficient evidence to objectively determine whether the property is any cleaner or dirtier than it was at the commencement of the tenancy.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The landlord claims that the tenant is liable for damage to windows, walls and doors, a section of the driveway, and two power sockets.
To succeed with a claim for damage the landlord must prove that damage 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 of the Act.
Fair wear and tear can be described as damage which might reasonably be expected to naturally occur over time, such as the deterioration or gradual wear occurring with everyday use. See Taylor v Webb [1937] 2KB 283 (CA).
Where the damage is careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B of the Act 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) of the Act.
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) of the Act.
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.
In dealing with the issue of carelessness the question is whether the tenant was exercising a degree of care and attention that a reasonable and prudent tenant would exercise in the circumstances. The test is objective and not based on the subjective opinion of the tenant or landlord.
In awarding compensation for damage, the Tribunal must also consider 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, the Tribunal must consider the age and condition of the items concerned at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Windows
The landlord is claiming that the tenant is responsible for fourteen broken windows throughout the property, including glass panels in two ranch sliders. The landlord claims this is damage that has occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear.
Reviewing the inspection reports and photographs there are twelve windows that have clearly been damaged. I am satisfied that the damage has occurred during the tenancy and that it is more than fair wear and tear.
The total claim for window repair is $3,200.00. The invoice is not itemised. The average cost of repairing each window is approximately $230.00. I reduce the claim by $460.00 and award the landlord $2,740.00. Walls and doors
The landlord is claiming $2,587.50 to repair damage to walls and doors. The end of tenancy photographs shows fifteen areas of discrete damage to walls and doors throughout the property. The tenancy report from October 2023 shows some pre-existing damage to walls and doors. The landlord states that this claim is for damage over and above that already present. The damage consists of small to medium sized holes, some of which the tenant has attempted to repair.
I am satisfied that the damage has occurred during the tenancy and that it is more than fair wear and tear.
The landlord states only the damaged areas were repaired, and that there has been no betterment. I accept that submission. The amount claimed is awarded in full.
A door to a downstairs bedroom is missing. I am satisfied that this is damage occurring during the tenancy which is more than fair wear and tear. The landlord is claiming $410.00 to replace the door, which includes the cost of the door, the door handle, installation, and painting. I award the amount claimed and make no deduction for betterment. Driveway
The driveway includes a paved parking area. There are gaps between the pavers where grass grows. The end of tenancy photographs show that these pavers have been removed and stacked against a nearby fence, on the deck, and in a cupboard inside the house. The landlord states they challenged the tenant during an inspection and were told that the tenant had removed them because they preferred lawn, but that the pavers would be replaced at the end of the tenancy. They were not. The landlord is seeking $280.00 to re-lay the pavers. This is reasonable and awarded in full.
There is no evidence concerning the damaged power sockets, and that claim is dismissed. Other
On 11 June 2024, the Tribunal made an order relating to this tenancy, for termination and rent arrears. The previous order is incorporated into this order for enforcement purposes. Costs
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. Name suppression.
The landlord seeks name suppression.
Section 95A of the Act provides that on the application of a party that has been wholly or substantially successful in proceedings, the Tribunal must order that the name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that it is in the public interest to publish the names of the parties, or is justified because of the parties’ conduct, or any other circumstances of the case.
The landlord has been substantially successful in these proceedings and is granted name suppression.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4967514 — Property damage at 3 Queenwood Avenue, Queenwood, Hamilton 3210

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4967514 — Property damage at 3 Queenwood Avenue, Queenwood, Hamilton 3210

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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