What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4985671 about?

The tribunal order states: Lisa Maree Hughes must pay Figjam Investments Limited $1,180.00 from the

How much money was awarded in case 4985671?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $390.84 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $762.16 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4985671?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4985671?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11413471-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4985671 about?

The tribunal order states: Lisa Maree Hughes must pay Figjam Investments Limited $1,180.00 from the

How much money was awarded in case 4985671?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $390.84 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $762.16 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4985671?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4985671?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11413471-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

36 Lyndhurst Road, Tawa, Wellington 5028 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4985671 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4985671. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$762.16	Rent arrears
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Repairs (part contribution	$390.84	Repairs (part contribution
Bond	$1,180.00

The landlord attended the hearing, conducted via teleconference. They were overseas and somewhat unprepared to commence the hearing.

Two calls to the tenant went unanswered and to voicemail. After the first call went to voicemail, a brief message was left introducing myself and explaining the purpose of the call. The message concluded with the advice I would try a second time after waiting some minutes. I was satisfied adequate service had completed and I continued with the hearing after the second call also went unanswered.

The tenancy agreement provided was incomplete and did not provide the insurance information.

The landlord provided the insurance information after the hearing. The tenancy agreement as provided again stills remains incomplete. However, I have sufficient information to satisfy me that there is no appropriate insurance cover for the tenant damage.

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 ended on 20 August 2024. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy was $762.16. This is revised downwards from the $1,180.00 initially claimed, after a subsequent landlord reconciliation of banking records.

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 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.

The following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. A hole in one wall. b. Spot paint damage after the removal of a number of stick on wall fixtures, affixed during the tenancy.

The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The landlord had submitted a repair quote for $1,430 ex GST. The description of tasks stated: •Remedial work, make good from tenant damage, •Replace section of gib to wall, plaster, and paint •Remove stickers from ceiling and walls to bedroom •Plaster and paint •Allowed to supply paint/plaster and consumables

The landlord completed the work itself. It sought compensation on the basis of the quote ex GST amount.

Limited photos were provided but one shows the hole in the wall while a later photo shows a quality repair. I am satisfied the landlord carried out the repairs as claimed.

A party who brings a claim to the Tenancy Tribunal must prove on the balance of probabilities (more likely than not) that their version of events took place. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden of proof.

The issue of evidence at Tenancy Tribunal hearings was considered by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02. Judge Mather stated: “...[the applicant] needs to be reminded that like anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or a Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.”

Having reviewed the evidence I have some concerns regarding tenant liability for the full cost as claimed. The quote does not separate how it is applied to the separate damaged areas. The hole (the most significant damage) appears to correspondent with the area on that wall the door handle would be likely to strike if opened with force. The photo does not indicate any doorstop was in place – a protective measure that would appear reasonable. That, combined with depreciation considerations given the likely age of the wall finish, means I accept some tenant liability but make a reduced award. The lack of ingoing comparative photos means I rely on interpreting what I can from the limited photos provided.

I have taken into account 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 considering depreciation, I have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan as best I can ascertain.

For the reason above reasons I make an award towards the cost of repair of $380.94. This amount appears a reasonable contribution towards the landlord repairs, balancing the damages and the likely cause along, with the overall condition of the walls at the end of the tenancy. That the amount is the balance of the bond is intentional and reflects a rounding for administrative ease of collection.

As the landlord has been substantially successful I return the application filing fee.

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4985671. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$762.16	Rent arrears
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Repairs (part contribution	$390.84	Repairs (part contribution
Bond	$1,180.00

The landlord attended the hearing, conducted via teleconference. They were overseas and somewhat unprepared to commence the hearing.

The tenancy agreement provided was incomplete and did not provide the insurance information.

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?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. A hole in one wall. b. Spot paint damage after the removal of a number of stick on wall fixtures, affixed during the tenancy.

The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The landlord completed the work itself. It sought compensation on the basis of the quote ex GST amount.

Limited photos were provided but one shows the hole in the wall while a later photo shows a quality repair. I am satisfied the landlord carried out the repairs as claimed.

As the landlord has been substantially successful I return the application filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4985671 — Rent arrears at 36 Lyndhurst Road, Tawa, Wellington 5028

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4985671 — Rent arrears at 36 Lyndhurst Road, Tawa, Wellington 5028

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

How much is owed for rent?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions