What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4977787 about?

The tribunal order states: Crissy-Lee Dunn must pay [The landlord/s] $2,266.04 immediately, calculated as

How much money was awarded in case 4977787?

Cleaning: $230.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $253.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $550.85 awarded to landlord; Lost Rent: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Walls And Carpet: $1,482.45 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $222.74 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4977787?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4977787?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11023665-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4977787 about?

The tribunal order states: Crissy-Lee Dunn must pay [The landlord/s] $2,266.04 immediately, calculated as

How much money was awarded in case 4977787?

Cleaning: $230.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $253.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $550.85 awarded to landlord; Lost Rent: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Walls And Carpet: $1,482.45 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $222.74 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4977787?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4977787?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11023665-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4977787 — Property damage

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4977787 — net $2,266.04 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Water rates (final	$222.74	Water rates (final
Cleaning	$253.00	Cleaning
Carpet Cleaning	$230.00	Carpet Cleaning
Repairs: walls and carpet	$1,482.45	Repairs: walls and carpet
Lawns and Garden work	$550.85	Lawns and Garden work
Lost rent (excess	$500.00	Lost rent (excess
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,266.04
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,266.04

Order

Crissy-Lee Dunn must pay [The landlord/s] $2,266.04 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,000.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 30 October 2024.
The landlord has applied for compensation and refund of the bond for costs incurred after the end of the tenancy. Some of the landlord’s claims are based on quotes for work that has not been done.
The tenant disagrees with some of the claims. Final water rates
The tenant agrees that the amount owing for the final water bill is correct, so this is ordered. Cleaning and carpet cleaning
At the end of a 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 Tribunal generally considers “reasonably clean and tidy” to mean that the floors are vacuumed, bathrooms and toilets cleaned, kitchen and laundry cupboards, benches, and appliances wiped. Windows, walls, doors and skirtings, and light switches and fittings should be cleaned if especially marked or dirty.
Professional carpet shampooing may be needed if it has been a long tenancy or there are stains or smells.
The house does not have to be spotless or pristine, or necessarily returned to the same standard it was presented in. If a landlord wishes to clean the premises to a higher standard in preparation for the next tenants, then they are free to do so - at their own cost and effort.
My decision is that, mostly, the house was left reasonably clean and tidy. A few areas were missed (inside kitchen drawers and rubbish bin, one toilet, floor behind door, sides of two internal doors, fly dirt main lounge ceiling). The invoice is modest, and I award half of this to the landlord to cover the missed areas.
The carpet was marked in places and two rooms suffered stains. I award the claim for professional carpet cleaning and the invoice is reasonable. Damage
The law in regard to damage to tenancy premises is that:- a. A landlord must first prove that any damage to the premises occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. b. 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. c. 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. See section 49B(3)(a) RTA.
Everything is subject to wear and tear and will need to be replaced in time. If an item must be replaced earlier because of tenant damage, and is replaced with a newer or better item, then the compensation needs to be adjusted to reflect that. A landlord should not be in a better position after a claim in the Tribunal, then the landlord would have been if the damage had not occurred.
Claims for compensation must be reasonable. For example, if there is a small chip off a kitchen bench, it may not be reasonable to require a tenant to pay the cost to replace the whole bench.
The Tribunal will sometimes accept quotes for any claimed loss instead of invoices and receipts, but it is relevant to ask whether the cost will be incurred. If the landlord does not get the repair done, then the loss may be better assessed as a loss of value. Interior damage
The evidence satisfies me that the following interior damage was caused during the tenancy, is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage: a. The tenant arranged for the plaster repair of a small hole in the garage wall (she said her freezer lid hit the wall) but the repair was left unpainted. The landlord did not prove there was any other damage in the garage caused by the tenant; b. Damage to the paint surface of walls in two rooms (bedroom two and the second lounge) caused by adhesive strips of LED lights the tenant’s family had installed during the tenancy and removed at the end; c. Two small dents behind doors in two bedrooms (probably caused by the doors hitting the walls); d. Application of enamel paint instead of wall paint on one area of wall in the master bedroom; e. Three dark pink stains and one burn mark on the carpet in bedroom two; f. A cluster of small burn marks or stains on the carpet in the second lounge.
The landlord has insurance that covers the damage and claims have been accepted. The landlord has received a cash settlement of $5,505.05 from the insurer from which she has paid $3,300.00 to repair the wall damage listed above.
There is an amount of $2,205.00 remaining which is available to use to remediate the carpet in the second lounge and bedroom two (items e and f, above).
The carpet in the two affected rooms has not yet been replaced. The landlord says this is because new carpet will not match the rest of the house, so she is still deciding what to do.
My decision is that it is reasonable for the landlord to be compensated for the quoted cost to replace the carpet in the two rooms because:- a. although the existing carpet was about 5 years old at the start of this tenancy, it was in very good condition as it had been professionally cleaned regularly; b. the pink stains in bedroom two remain very visible after carpet cleaning. The quoted cost for replacement carpet (on the insurance assessment email) is $1,588.44; c. the small burns or marks in the second lounge are less visible and affect a smaller area however I accept the landlord’s submission that the damage is in the middle of the floor so affects the appearance of the whole room. The quoted cost for replacement carpet is $2,099.01.
The amount needed to replace the carpet in the two rooms is $3,687.45 ($1,588.44 + $2,099.01).
The landlord has a remaining credit of $2,205.00 from the insurer.
I find the tenant is liable for $1,482.45. This will result in the landlord being compensated the amount needed to replace the carpet in the two rooms ($2,205.00 credit from the insurer + $1,482.45 from the tenant = $3,687.45).
I do not award additional compensation for the repainting of the patch in the garage as this is covered by the insurance settlement and the amount payable by the tenant. Exterior damage
The tenant agrees that her children left marks on 4 bricks on the cladding of the house. The landlord supplied a quote for $402.50 to replace the bricks but has not done this work. There is no evidence as to whether an attempt has been made to clean the bricks. The visible effect is minor, and the landlord has not incurred a cost. I do not award compensation.
The evidence satisfies me that the gardens and lawns were damaged during the tenancy to a level that is more than normal wear and tear. Specifically:- a. The edges of the lawns were left bare to varying widths of between about 10cm up to 50cm in places (including under a piece of plywood used for the tenant’s dog), and b. All plants in a grisilinia hedge died during the tenancy.
The tenant explained that one of the family had used weedkiller on lawn edges during the tenancy. My decision is that the damage to the lawn edges is careless damage.
It is not known for sure what killed the hedge, but the landlord has shown that all plants died during the tenancy. I find it to be more probable than not that weedkiller accidentally killed the hedge.
The landlord supplied an invoice for $999.35 for replacement of the hedge and repair of the lawn edges with topsoil and grass seed. The invoice has been issued for work done by a company owned by the landlord’s family members. This is acceptable if the cost has in fact been incurred and paid by the landlord. The evidence of this is unclear (the payment record seems to show the invoice was paid on the day of the hearing). I award the cost of the plants, topsoil and grass seed and fertilizer which is $550.85 ($479.00 +gst $71.85) which I find to be reasonable compensation. Loss of rent
The landlord says that the damage to the house meant she could not rent out the premises as quickly as she should have been able to. She advises there was a five-week period before new tenants moved in.
The Tribunal will not easily award this type of claim because a landlord is usually expected to allow some time to do cleaning and maintenance between tenancies. In this case, I accept that the work that needed to be done inside the house did delay new tenants moving in. I award $500.00 being the insurance excess on any claim the landlord may choose to make for this loss. Bond, filing fee, suppression
The landlord has been substantially successful, so I award the filing fee and suppress her name, as sought.
The bond is refunded to the landlord.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4977787 — net $2,266.04 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Water rates (final	$222.74	Water rates (final
Cleaning	$253.00	Cleaning
Carpet Cleaning	$230.00	Carpet Cleaning
Repairs: walls and carpet	$1,482.45	Repairs: walls and carpet
Lawns and Garden work	$550.85	Lawns and Garden work
Lost rent (excess	$500.00	Lost rent (excess
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,266.04
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,266.04

Order

Crissy-Lee Dunn must pay [The landlord/s] $2,266.04 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,000.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 30 October 2024.
The landlord has applied for compensation and refund of the bond for costs incurred after the end of the tenancy. Some of the landlord’s claims are based on quotes for work that has not been done.
The tenant disagrees with some of the claims. Final water rates
The tenant agrees that the amount owing for the final water bill is correct, so this is ordered. Cleaning and carpet cleaning
At the end of a 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 Tribunal generally considers “reasonably clean and tidy” to mean that the floors are vacuumed, bathrooms and toilets cleaned, kitchen and laundry cupboards, benches, and appliances wiped. Windows, walls, doors and skirtings, and light switches and fittings should be cleaned if especially marked or dirty.
Professional carpet shampooing may be needed if it has been a long tenancy or there are stains or smells.
The house does not have to be spotless or pristine, or necessarily returned to the same standard it was presented in. If a landlord wishes to clean the premises to a higher standard in preparation for the next tenants, then they are free to do so - at their own cost and effort.
My decision is that, mostly, the house was left reasonably clean and tidy. A few areas were missed (inside kitchen drawers and rubbish bin, one toilet, floor behind door, sides of two internal doors, fly dirt main lounge ceiling). The invoice is modest, and I award half of this to the landlord to cover the missed areas.
The carpet was marked in places and two rooms suffered stains. I award the claim for professional carpet cleaning and the invoice is reasonable. Damage
The law in regard to damage to tenancy premises is that:- a. A landlord must first prove that any damage to the premises occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. b. 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. c. 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. See section 49B(3)(a) RTA.
Everything is subject to wear and tear and will need to be replaced in time. If an item must be replaced earlier because of tenant damage, and is replaced with a newer or better item, then the compensation needs to be adjusted to reflect that. A landlord should not be in a better position after a claim in the Tribunal, then the landlord would have been if the damage had not occurred.
Claims for compensation must be reasonable. For example, if there is a small chip off a kitchen bench, it may not be reasonable to require a tenant to pay the cost to replace the whole bench.
The Tribunal will sometimes accept quotes for any claimed loss instead of invoices and receipts, but it is relevant to ask whether the cost will be incurred. If the landlord does not get the repair done, then the loss may be better assessed as a loss of value. Interior damage
The evidence satisfies me that the following interior damage was caused during the tenancy, is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage: a. The tenant arranged for the plaster repair of a small hole in the garage wall (she said her freezer lid hit the wall) but the repair was left unpainted. The landlord did not prove there was any other damage in the garage caused by the tenant; b. Damage to the paint surface of walls in two rooms (bedroom two and the second lounge) caused by adhesive strips of LED lights the tenant’s family had installed during the tenancy and removed at the end; c. Two small dents behind doors in two bedrooms (probably caused by the doors hitting the walls); d. Application of enamel paint instead of wall paint on one area of wall in the master bedroom; e. Three dark pink stains and one burn mark on the carpet in bedroom two; f. A cluster of small burn marks or stains on the carpet in the second lounge.
The landlord has insurance that covers the damage and claims have been accepted. The landlord has received a cash settlement of $5,505.05 from the insurer from which she has paid $3,300.00 to repair the wall damage listed above.
There is an amount of $2,205.00 remaining which is available to use to remediate the carpet in the second lounge and bedroom two (items e and f, above).
The carpet in the two affected rooms has not yet been replaced. The landlord says this is because new carpet will not match the rest of the house, so she is still deciding what to do.
My decision is that it is reasonable for the landlord to be compensated for the quoted cost to replace the carpet in the two rooms because:- a. although the existing carpet was about 5 years old at the start of this tenancy, it was in very good condition as it had been professionally cleaned regularly; b. the pink stains in bedroom two remain very visible after carpet cleaning. The quoted cost for replacement carpet (on the insurance assessment email) is $1,588.44; c. the small burns or marks in the second lounge are less visible and affect a smaller area however I accept the landlord’s submission that the damage is in the middle of the floor so affects the appearance of the whole room. The quoted cost for replacement carpet is $2,099.01.
The amount needed to replace the carpet in the two rooms is $3,687.45 ($1,588.44 + $2,099.01).
The landlord has a remaining credit of $2,205.00 from the insurer.
I find the tenant is liable for $1,482.45. This will result in the landlord being compensated the amount needed to replace the carpet in the two rooms ($2,205.00 credit from the insurer + $1,482.45 from the tenant = $3,687.45).
I do not award additional compensation for the repainting of the patch in the garage as this is covered by the insurance settlement and the amount payable by the tenant. Exterior damage
The tenant agrees that her children left marks on 4 bricks on the cladding of the house. The landlord supplied a quote for $402.50 to replace the bricks but has not done this work. There is no evidence as to whether an attempt has been made to clean the bricks. The visible effect is minor, and the landlord has not incurred a cost. I do not award compensation.
The evidence satisfies me that the gardens and lawns were damaged during the tenancy to a level that is more than normal wear and tear. Specifically:- a. The edges of the lawns were left bare to varying widths of between about 10cm up to 50cm in places (including under a piece of plywood used for the tenant’s dog), and b. All plants in a grisilinia hedge died during the tenancy.
The tenant explained that one of the family had used weedkiller on lawn edges during the tenancy. My decision is that the damage to the lawn edges is careless damage.
It is not known for sure what killed the hedge, but the landlord has shown that all plants died during the tenancy. I find it to be more probable than not that weedkiller accidentally killed the hedge.
The landlord supplied an invoice for $999.35 for replacement of the hedge and repair of the lawn edges with topsoil and grass seed. The invoice has been issued for work done by a company owned by the landlord’s family members. This is acceptable if the cost has in fact been incurred and paid by the landlord. The evidence of this is unclear (the payment record seems to show the invoice was paid on the day of the hearing). I award the cost of the plants, topsoil and grass seed and fertilizer which is $550.85 ($479.00 +gst $71.85) which I find to be reasonable compensation. Loss of rent
The landlord says that the damage to the house meant she could not rent out the premises as quickly as she should have been able to. She advises there was a five-week period before new tenants moved in.
The Tribunal will not easily award this type of claim because a landlord is usually expected to allow some time to do cleaning and maintenance between tenancies. In this case, I accept that the work that needed to be done inside the house did delay new tenants moving in. I award $500.00 being the insurance excess on any claim the landlord may choose to make for this loss. Bond, filing fee, suppression
The landlord has been substantially successful, so I award the filing fee and suppress her name, as sought.
The bond is refunded to the landlord.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4977787 — Property damage

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4977787 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions