What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4984178 about?

The tribunal order states: Christopher Himiona must pay [The landlord/s] $365.70 immediately, calculated

How much money was awarded in case 4984178?

Cleaning: $241.50 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $124.20 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4984178?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4984178?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11056944-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4984178 about?

The tribunal order states: Christopher Himiona must pay [The landlord/s] $365.70 immediately, calculated

How much money was awarded in case 4984178?

Cleaning: $241.50 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $124.20 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4984178?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4984178?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11056944-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4984178 — Cleanliness

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4984178 — net $392.70 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Carpet and mattress Cleaning	$241.50	Carpet and mattress Cleaning
Repairs to wall	$124.20	Repairs to wall
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$392.70
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$392.70

[ redacted ] appeared for the landlord. There was no appearance by the tenant.

The tenancy commenced on 07 October 2022 and ended on 03 August 2024. On 09 September 2024, the landlord filed a claim alleging that the tenant failed to leave the carpet and a mattress in a reasonably clean condition and caused damage to a section of wall next to the bathroom mirror.

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”).

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) of the Act.

The landlord has produced pre and post tenancy checklists, both of which contain photographs.

The property is a one bedroom furnished studio apartment. One of the chattels provided is a bed. The mattress had no marks or stains at the commencement of the tenancy. To avoid staining, the tenant was advised to use a mattress protector. The end of tenancy photographs show that the mattress has multiple stains. These were removed by cleaning.

The end of tenancy photographs also show a large yellowish stain on the carpet. The landlord suggests it may be a food stain. The carpet did not have any stains at the commencement of the tenancy. The stain was removed by cleaning.

I am satisfied that the tenant has failed to leave the mattress and carpet in a reasonably clean condition. The compensation claimed is awarded.

Is the tenant responsible for damage to the premises?

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.

As stated in awarding compensation for damage, the Tribunal must also consider betterment and depreciation. In calculating depreciation, the Tribunal must consider the age and condition of the items concerned at the start of the tenancy and their estimated useful lifespan. Wall

The end of tenancy photographs show a section of wall with paint damage beside the bathroom mirror. The landlord states the damage was likely caused by the removal of LED lights affixed to the wall. The wall was undamaged at the start of the tenancy. I am satisfied that the damage occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. Based on the photographs, and the explanation provided, the damage likely the result of carelessness. The compensation claimed and awarded is less than the insurance excess. Costs

Because [The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee. Name suppression.

The landlord seeks name suppression. The landlord has been wholly successful and is granted name suppression. See section 95A of the Act.

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4984178 — net $392.70 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Carpet and mattress Cleaning	$241.50	Carpet and mattress Cleaning
Repairs to wall	$124.20	Repairs to wall
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$392.70
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$392.70

[ redacted ] appeared for the landlord. There was no appearance by the tenant.

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

The landlord has produced pre and post tenancy checklists, both of which contain photographs.

I am satisfied that the tenant has failed to leave the mattress and carpet in a reasonably clean condition. The compensation claimed is awarded.

Is the tenant responsible for damage to the premises?

Because [The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee. Name suppression.

The landlord seeks name suppression. The landlord has been wholly successful and is granted name suppression. See section 95A of the Act.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4984178 — Cleanliness

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4984178 — Cleanliness

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Is the tenant responsible for damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Is the tenant responsible for damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions