What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4984508?

The tribunal order states: Kari Elsie Sheila Gilmour must pay Regent Realty Limited t/a Harcourts as

How much money was awarded in case 4984508?

Cleaning: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $400.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Methamphetamine Contamination Remedi…: $1,250.00 awarded to landlord; Outdoor Waste Removal: $250.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $793.83 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $25.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $425.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $169.40 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4984508?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4984508?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11045889-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4984508?

The tribunal order states: Kari Elsie Sheila Gilmour must pay Regent Realty Limited t/a Harcourts as

How much money was awarded in case 4984508?

Cleaning: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $400.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Methamphetamine Contamination Remedi…: $1,250.00 awarded to landlord; Outdoor Waste Removal: $250.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $793.83 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $25.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $425.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $169.40 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4984508?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4984508?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11045889-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 4, 806 Lyell Street, Akina, Hastings 4122 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4984508 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Unit/Flat 4, 806 Lyell Street, Akina, Hastings 4122 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4984508 — Property damage | TenantCheck

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4984508 — net $3,440.23 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$425.00	Rent arrears
Cleaning	$100.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$169.40	Rubbish removal
Methamphetamine contamination remediation	$1,250.00	Methamphetamine contamination remediation
Outdoor waste removal	$250.00	Outdoor waste removal
Window repairs	$793.83	Window repairs
Lock/key replacement	$25.00	Lock/key replacement
Exemplary damages: unlawful use of premises	$400.00	unlawful use of premises
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,440.23
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,440.23

Claims and awards for application 4984508 — net $3,440.23 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears

Amount: $425.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears

Cleaning

Amount: $100.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning

Rubbish removal

Amount: $169.40
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal

Methamphetamine contamination remediation

Amount: $1,250.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Methamphetamine contamination remediation

Outdoor waste removal

Amount: $250.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Outdoor waste removal

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Exemplary damages Filing Fee Property damage Rent arrears Rubbish Removal

Order

Kari Elsie Sheila Gilmour must pay Regent Realty Limited t/a Harcourts as Agent for Alam & Madhu Singh & Bala $3,440.23 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not attend and was unable to be contacted by phone.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy was ended on 19 June 2024 by Order of the Tribunal dated 20 June 2024 (application 4884560) (“June Order”). The tenant remained in occupation until 26 June 2024 so is liable for rent through to that date. See s.60(1) RTA.
The bond has been released to the landlord in accordance with the June Order which also fixed the arrears owing to 19 June 2024. Steps have been taken to enforce the June Order so I have not incorporated the sums owing under that Order into this Order.

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.
End of tenancy photographs provide by the landlord show that a significant quantity of rubbish was left at the premises which needed to be removed. The property manager arranged for a contractor to remove the outdoor and garden waste. The amount paid by the owner is proved by the invoice provided. The other waste was removed by the property manager who hired a trailer and took it to the transfer station. The sums paid are proved by invoices provided.
The tenant did not return the keys. The landlord seeks compensation for the cost of having the locks changed and deadlocks fitted. While I understand the landlord’s reason for doing so, the tenant’s obligation is to return the keys provided to her, at the end of the tenancy, so only compensation for the cost of getting replacement keys is appropriate.
The steps taken to decontaminate the premises will mean the premises are cleaned. I accept the landlord’s evidence however that some cleaning, not covered by that de-contamination work, will still be required, such as the oven and bathroom. Reasonable compensation for that cost is appropriate.
The amounts ordered are proved.

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.
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.
Photographs provided by the landlord show 2 windows broken during the tenancy. It seems they are likely to have been broken by visitors to the premises but in the absence of other evidence from the tenant there is no basis for assuming that they were not there with the tenant’s consent (see s.41). The repair cost is proved by invoices provided by the landlord. Methamphetamine contamination
A composite methamphetamine test of the premises carried out on 26 June 2024 showed contamination over the 9 samples tested, of 38μg per 100cm 2 . Detailed testing showed contamination over 13 test sites ranging from 0.31μg per 100cm 2 in the bathroom to 16.2μg per 100cm 2 in the kitchen.
A composite test was carried out on 22 November 2022 (this tenancy began on 15 December 2022) showing no methamphetamine contamination. I therefore find it proved that the contamination found in the 26 June 2024 tests, occurred during the tenancy.
For reasons traversed in a number of Tribunal decisions, the Tribunal uses the “Gluckman Standard” of 15μg per 100cm 2 as the contamination level at which premises should be regarded as contaminated and in need of remediation.
As noted in the Gluckman report 1 “Remediation according to the NZS 8510:2017 standard is appropriate only for identified former meth labs and properties where excessive methamphetamine use, as indicated by high levels of methamphetamine contamination, has been determined.”
What that means is that here, where the testing establishes a high level of use exceeding 15μg per 100cm 2 in part of the premises, remediation according to the NZS8510:2017 standard is appropriate. That remediation requires returning contamination levels throughout the premises to below 1.5μg per 100cm 2 .
The landlord brought an insurance claim which was accepted and decontamination in accordance with NZS8510:2017 was undertaken. The 1 Methamphetamine contamination in residential properties: Exposures, risk levels, and interpretation of standards: OFFICE OF THE PRIME MINISTER’S CHIEF SCIENCE ADVISOR Professor Sir Peter Gluckman, ONZ KNZM FRSNZ FMedSci FRS Chief Science Advisor - 29 May 2018 excess paid by the owner for that claim was $1,250.00, as disclosed in the tenancy agreement.
The landlord is entitled to be compensated for that loss.

Should Exemplary Damages be awarded?

A tenant must not use the premises or permit the premises to be used for an unlawful purpose. See section 40(2)(b) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $1,800.00. See section 40(3A)(c) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
It is unlawful to use methamphetamine in the premises. By doing so the tenant has committed an unlawful act.
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. See section 109(3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The unlawful act was committed intentionally.
The landlord has loss of rents insurance, so has been indemnified against the loss caused by the premises not being able to be rented while decontamination work was carried out.
There has however been a loss in terms of the distress caused to other tenants of the landlord who live nearby, one of whom, the property manager says, vacated due to safety concerns.
In the absence of evidence from the tenant pointing to any mitigating factors, I find that a modest award of exemplary damages would be just to highlight that engaging in such activities in residential premises, with the anti-social activity that routinely accompanies it, have implications not only for the tenant and her family but for the landlord and in particular for other residents who are entitled to have their right to peaceful occupation of their homes respected.
There is a clear public interest in dissuading tenants of residential properties from engaging in such conduct.
Because Regent Realty Limited t/a Harcourts as Agent for Alam & Madhu Singh & Bala has succeeded with the claim I reimburse the filing fee.

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4984508 — net $3,440.23 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$425.00	Rent arrears
Cleaning	$100.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$169.40	Rubbish removal
Methamphetamine contamination remediation	$1,250.00	Methamphetamine contamination remediation
Outdoor waste removal	$250.00	Outdoor waste removal
Window repairs	$793.83	Window repairs
Lock/key replacement	$25.00	Lock/key replacement
Exemplary damages: unlawful use of premises	$400.00	unlawful use of premises
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,440.23
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,440.23

Claims and awards for application 4984508 — net $3,440.23 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears

Amount: $425.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears

Cleaning

Amount: $100.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning

Rubbish removal

Amount: $169.40
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal

Methamphetamine contamination remediation

Amount: $1,250.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Methamphetamine contamination remediation

Outdoor waste removal

Amount: $250.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Outdoor waste removal

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Exemplary damages Filing Fee Property damage Rent arrears Rubbish Removal

Order

Kari Elsie Sheila Gilmour must pay Regent Realty Limited t/a Harcourts as Agent for Alam & Madhu Singh & Bala $3,440.23 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not attend and was unable to be contacted by phone.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy was ended on 19 June 2024 by Order of the Tribunal dated 20 June 2024 (application 4884560) (“June Order”). The tenant remained in occupation until 26 June 2024 so is liable for rent through to that date. See s.60(1) RTA.
The bond has been released to the landlord in accordance with the June Order which also fixed the arrears owing to 19 June 2024. Steps have been taken to enforce the June Order so I have not incorporated the sums owing under that Order into this Order.

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.
End of tenancy photographs provide by the landlord show that a significant quantity of rubbish was left at the premises which needed to be removed. The property manager arranged for a contractor to remove the outdoor and garden waste. The amount paid by the owner is proved by the invoice provided. The other waste was removed by the property manager who hired a trailer and took it to the transfer station. The sums paid are proved by invoices provided.
The tenant did not return the keys. The landlord seeks compensation for the cost of having the locks changed and deadlocks fitted. While I understand the landlord’s reason for doing so, the tenant’s obligation is to return the keys provided to her, at the end of the tenancy, so only compensation for the cost of getting replacement keys is appropriate.
The steps taken to decontaminate the premises will mean the premises are cleaned. I accept the landlord’s evidence however that some cleaning, not covered by that de-contamination work, will still be required, such as the oven and bathroom. Reasonable compensation for that cost is appropriate.
The amounts ordered are proved.

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.
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.
Photographs provided by the landlord show 2 windows broken during the tenancy. It seems they are likely to have been broken by visitors to the premises but in the absence of other evidence from the tenant there is no basis for assuming that they were not there with the tenant’s consent (see s.41). The repair cost is proved by invoices provided by the landlord. Methamphetamine contamination
A composite methamphetamine test of the premises carried out on 26 June 2024 showed contamination over the 9 samples tested, of 38μg per 100cm 2 . Detailed testing showed contamination over 13 test sites ranging from 0.31μg per 100cm 2 in the bathroom to 16.2μg per 100cm 2 in the kitchen.
A composite test was carried out on 22 November 2022 (this tenancy began on 15 December 2022) showing no methamphetamine contamination. I therefore find it proved that the contamination found in the 26 June 2024 tests, occurred during the tenancy.
For reasons traversed in a number of Tribunal decisions, the Tribunal uses the “Gluckman Standard” of 15μg per 100cm 2 as the contamination level at which premises should be regarded as contaminated and in need of remediation.
As noted in the Gluckman report 1 “Remediation according to the NZS 8510:2017 standard is appropriate only for identified former meth labs and properties where excessive methamphetamine use, as indicated by high levels of methamphetamine contamination, has been determined.”
What that means is that here, where the testing establishes a high level of use exceeding 15μg per 100cm 2 in part of the premises, remediation according to the NZS8510:2017 standard is appropriate. That remediation requires returning contamination levels throughout the premises to below 1.5μg per 100cm 2 .
The landlord brought an insurance claim which was accepted and decontamination in accordance with NZS8510:2017 was undertaken. The 1 Methamphetamine contamination in residential properties: Exposures, risk levels, and interpretation of standards: OFFICE OF THE PRIME MINISTER’S CHIEF SCIENCE ADVISOR Professor Sir Peter Gluckman, ONZ KNZM FRSNZ FMedSci FRS Chief Science Advisor - 29 May 2018 excess paid by the owner for that claim was $1,250.00, as disclosed in the tenancy agreement.
The landlord is entitled to be compensated for that loss.

Should Exemplary Damages be awarded?

A tenant must not use the premises or permit the premises to be used for an unlawful purpose. See section 40(2)(b) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $1,800.00. See section 40(3A)(c) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
It is unlawful to use methamphetamine in the premises. By doing so the tenant has committed an unlawful act.
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. See section 109(3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The unlawful act was committed intentionally.
The landlord has loss of rents insurance, so has been indemnified against the loss caused by the premises not being able to be rented while decontamination work was carried out.
There has however been a loss in terms of the distress caused to other tenants of the landlord who live nearby, one of whom, the property manager says, vacated due to safety concerns.
In the absence of evidence from the tenant pointing to any mitigating factors, I find that a modest award of exemplary damages would be just to highlight that engaging in such activities in residential premises, with the anti-social activity that routinely accompanies it, have implications not only for the tenant and her family but for the landlord and in particular for other residents who are entitled to have their right to peaceful occupation of their homes respected.
There is a clear public interest in dissuading tenants of residential properties from engaging in such conduct.
Because Regent Realty Limited t/a Harcourts as Agent for Alam & Madhu Singh & Bala has succeeded with the claim I reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4984508 — Property damage at Unit/Flat 4, 806 Lyell Street, Akina, Hastings 4122

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4984508 — Property damage at Unit/Flat 4, 806 Lyell Street, Akina, Hastings 4122

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Should Exemplary Damages be awarded?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Should Exemplary Damages be awarded?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions