What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4993421?

The tribunal order states: Foua Ionatana Lefaoseu must pay Oxygen.Co.Nz Limited As Agent For Ykm

How much money was awarded in case 4993421?

Cleaning: $747.50 awarded to landlord; Carpet Stain Treatment: $184.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $641.13 awarded to landlord; Electrician Call Out: $125.35 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $439.88 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $246.56 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $238.74 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $870.78 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $31.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $969.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,614.75 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,315.71 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $598.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4993421?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4993421?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10989346-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4993421?

The tribunal order states: Foua Ionatana Lefaoseu must pay Oxygen.Co.Nz Limited As Agent For Ykm

How much money was awarded in case 4993421?

Cleaning: $747.50 awarded to landlord; Carpet Stain Treatment: $184.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $641.13 awarded to landlord; Electrician Call Out: $125.35 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $439.88 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $246.56 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $238.74 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $870.78 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $31.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $969.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,614.75 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,315.71 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $598.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4993421?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4993421?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10989346-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 1, 1032 Fergusson Drive, Clouston Park, Upper Tenancy Tribunal Case 4993421 — Property damage

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4993421 — net $6,210.40 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$1,315.71	Rent arrears
General cleaning	$641.13	General cleaning
Carpet Cleaning	$747.50	Carpet Cleaning
Window repairs	$246.56	Window repairs
Curtain replacement	$238.74	Curtain replacement
Wall and door repair	$870.78	Wall and door repair
Key replacement	$31.50	Key replacement
Garden work and rubbish removal	$439.88	Garden work and rubbish removal
Rubbish removal	$598.00	Rubbish removal
Garage door and lock replacement	$969.50	Garage door and lock replacement
Carpet replacement	$1,614.75	Carpet replacement
Electrician call out	$125.35	Electrician call out
Carpet stain treatment	$184.00	Carpet stain treatment
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$6,210.40
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$6,210.40

Order

Foua Ionatana Lefaoseu must pay Oxygen.Co.Nz Limited As Agent For Ykm Trust Limited $6,210.40 immediately, calculated as shown in table below. DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears$1,315.71 General cleaning$641.13 Carpet Cleaning$747.50 Window repairs$246.56 Curtain replacement$238.74 Wall and door repair$870.78 Key replacement$31.50 Garden work and rubbish removal$439.88 Rubbish removal$598.00 Garage door and lock replacement$969.50 Carpet replacement$1,614.75 Electrician call out$125.35 Carpet stain treatment$184.00 Filing fee reimbursement$27.00 Total award$8,050.40 Minus bond-$1,840.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$6,210.40
The Bond of $1,840.00 is to be released immediately to Oxygen.Co.Nz Limited As Agent For Ykm Trust Limited.
All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

The Tribunal must consider an application filed by the landlord against the tenant.
Only the landlord appeared at the hearing. I am satisfied that the tenant has been properly notified of the hearing, and therefore I will proceed to consider the claim in their absence.
The tenancy commenced on 29 July 2022, and the landlord states the tenancy was vacated on 6 August 2024. The landlord now claims costs for various expenses at the end of the tenancy, and rent arrears.

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations.
That includes a requirement that the party bringing the claim (the applicant), establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. The balance of probabilities means more likely than unlikely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely.
This obligation carried by the applicant is referred to as the “burden of proof”. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
As noted by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: ... [L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or 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.

RENT ARREARS

The landlord has applied for an order that the tenant pay rent arrears of $1315.70 being arrears as of 6 August 2024 being the end of the 28 day notice from the tenants terminating the tenancy.
The landlord has provided the Tribunal with a rent ledger. I have no reason to consider that record to be incorrect.
The landlord has established that the tenant is in arrears of the amount claimed, and that is ordered in full.

CLEANING AND RUBBISH REMOVAL

The Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) requires that the landlord provide the premises to the tenant at the start of the tenancy in a reasonable state of cleanliness (s45(1)(a)), and there is an equivalent obligation on the tenant to return the premises: ...in a reasonably clean and reasonably tidy condition, and remove or arrange for the removal from the premises of all rubbish.
It is important to note that the RTA does not require the premises to be provided/returned in an immaculate condition, only in a reasonably clean and tidy state. There is no scientific way to determine what is ‘reasonably’ clean and tidy, what is required is for the Tribunal to evaluate the evidence available (particularly photographs presented), and then to determine whether the premises would be reasonably clean. General cleaning
The landlord has claimed $641.13 for cleaning the premises. Having considered the photographs I am satisfied that the premises were not returned to the landlord reasonably clean. The invoice from the cleaner seems reasonable given the state of the premises. This claim is ordered in full. Carpet cleaning
The landlord’s photographs show stains on the carpet in a number of rooms, some of those stains are extensive and very obvious, the carpet was new at the start of the tenancy. The landlord incurred carpet cleaning costs of $747.50 supported by an invoice from Jae Carpet Cleaning. I am satisfied this staining occurred during the tenancy, so I order this claim in full. Garden work and rubbish removal
The photographs show that the grounds were not reasonably tidy, there were extensive weeds, leaves having accumulated and some rubbish. But my impression is that there was some maintenance undertaken also. Considering the photographs I order 75% of the gardening invoice cost, therefore order $439.88. Rubbish removal
The landlord provided photographs which show extensive rubbish left on the premises including a mattress, bedbase, old pallets, and old fridge, couch, and a volume of other white structures (I am not sure what they are). In any event the cost to remove this rubbish was $598.00, and that is ordered in full. Carpet stain treatment
During the tenancy, a stain was noted on the carpet. The tenant had tried to clean it unsuccessful, and the tenant approved the landlord calling a commercial cleaner. This incurred costs of $184.00, and I find the tenant must be liable for this cost as a cleaning cost incurred at the tenants request.

COMPENSATION

With any compensation claim, to receive an order the party must incur a loss. In short, the compensation is intended as best money can do, to compensate for the actual loss incurred.
Where a landlord claims compensation for damage caused by a tenant, the landlord must first prove the damage 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.
Where the damage is caused carelessly, the tenant's liability is limited to the lesser of the insurance excess or four weeks' rent.
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.
Damage is intentional where a person intends to cause damage and takes the necessary steps to achieve that purpose. Damage is also intentional when a person does something, or allows a situation to continue, knowing that damage is a certainty. See the High Court decision of Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541. Broken glass
The landlord has claimed for glazing to a bathroom window. I am satisfied this damage occurred during the tenancy, it is not fair wear and tear. The tenant has not proven it was not careless or intentional, so this claim is ordered in full. The invoice from The Glass Shoppe is $246.56, and is ordered in full. Curtain replacement
The landlord states the curtains were new throughout the tenancy when the tenancy commenced. The evidence is that there is extensive mould on the curtains, and the landlord’s position is that it was more costs effective to replace the curtains rather than clean them, I accept that is the case given the amount claimed. The replacement cost was $318.31, but once depreciation is applied (I have used the Inland Revenue Depreciation Guides, the IR 265) the amount ordered will be $238.74. Wall and door repairs
The landlord claims for holes in the walls and door. The photographs support this damage. I am satisfied this damage occurred during the tenancy, it is not fair wear and tear. The tenant has not proven it was not careless or intentional, so this claim is ordered in full. The invoice from Say Painting for the repair is $870.78. Garage door and lock replacement
The garage door was new at the start of the tenancy. The photographs show significant dents in the door. The landlord advised the key has been snapped in the lock. A quotation to replace the door and lock is $969.50. I accept that is proportionate to the damage. I am satisfied this damage occurred during the tenancy, it is not fair wear and tear. The tenant has not proven it was not careless or intentional, so this claim is ordered in full. Shower box damage
The landlord states that the shower was new at the start of the tenancy. The photographs show that there were marks on the bottom of the shower tray. Based on the photographs, it looks as though some of the coating on fibreglass / plastic tray has come off, probably around where the user would stand, and near the drain in the centre of the tray.
This is a difficult claim because while I accept the damage that occurred during the tenancy, I am not persuaded that the damage is proven by the landlord to be beyond fair wear and tear. It is possible the damage was caused by the tenants, but that is only a possibility. It is also possible that there was a defect in the shower tray to cause the appearance seen on the photograph. If there was a defect, then normal use would mean that the damage arose from fair wear and tear.
While I have received a quotation, I have not received any report from a suitably qualified person who had assessed the shower tray, to present a view as to what has caused the damage.
Ultimately the onus sits with the landlord to establish that this is not a maintenance or fair wear and tear issue, and I find on the evidence available the landlord has not established that situation, so this claim must be dismissed. Floor repair
The landlord seeks the cost to replace the flooring in the kitchen and laundry. The photographs show some rust to the floor, presumably under the washing machine and other areas. Otherwise the landlord states that the flooring had been damaged where the edges of the vinyl had parted, which the landlord questions if there had been flooding in the kitchen. The landlord has claimed $978.00 being the actual cost of the replacement vinyl.
At the end of the tenancy the vinyl was two years old. While I accept the joins have separated, there is no evidence before me from a suitably qualified person explaining how that occurred, and linking it to the tenant. The landlord has not persuaded me that this is not a maintenance issue. The landlord says there was possibly flooding, that may be the case but the evidence falls short of proving that, and explaining how flooding would have resulted in the need to replace vinyl flooring.
This claim has not been established so is dismissed. Carpet replacement
The landlord seeks costs to replace the carpet, the quotation is $2,153.00. I have noted the extensive staining above. In my assessment the staining is so extensive, that it must be viewed as intentional staining taking into consideration the cases I have noted in the general law above.
Again applying depreciation using the IR 265 guides, I order the tenant to pay $1,614.75. Electrician cost
The landlord received a request from the tenant to have an electrician come and fix the oven. As it turned out there was no problem with the oven, but the tenant had set the timer on the oven so it was not turning on. This is a cost incurred by the landlord which did not relate to any obligation the landlord had, such as maintenance. It was incurred at the request of the tenants, so the tenants must pay for that call-out fee. The invoice was $125.35, which is ordered in full.

LOCK AND KEY REPLACEMENT

The landlord has claimed compensation for lock and key replacement. Section 40 of the RTA sets out the tenant’s responsibilities, and that includes that at the end of the tenancy the tenant must “return to the landlord all keys, and security or pass cards or other such devices, provided by the landlord for use of the tenant”.
The tenant did not return all keys. The landlord had the keys replaced, and the tenant will be liable for the costs of replacing the missing keys, being $31.50

FILING FEE

The applicant has been mostly successful in their claim before the Tribunal. I find it is reasonable therefore to award the filing fee paid to commence the proceeding in the Tribunal, which is $27.00.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4993421 — net $6,210.40 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$1,315.71	Rent arrears
General cleaning	$641.13	General cleaning
Carpet Cleaning	$747.50	Carpet Cleaning
Window repairs	$246.56	Window repairs
Curtain replacement	$238.74	Curtain replacement
Wall and door repair	$870.78	Wall and door repair
Key replacement	$31.50	Key replacement
Garden work and rubbish removal	$439.88	Garden work and rubbish removal
Rubbish removal	$598.00	Rubbish removal
Garage door and lock replacement	$969.50	Garage door and lock replacement
Carpet replacement	$1,614.75	Carpet replacement
Electrician call out	$125.35	Electrician call out
Carpet stain treatment	$184.00	Carpet stain treatment
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$6,210.40
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$6,210.40

Order

Foua Ionatana Lefaoseu must pay Oxygen.Co.Nz Limited As Agent For Ykm Trust Limited $6,210.40 immediately, calculated as shown in table below. DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears$1,315.71 General cleaning$641.13 Carpet Cleaning$747.50 Window repairs$246.56 Curtain replacement$238.74 Wall and door repair$870.78 Key replacement$31.50 Garden work and rubbish removal$439.88 Rubbish removal$598.00 Garage door and lock replacement$969.50 Carpet replacement$1,614.75 Electrician call out$125.35 Carpet stain treatment$184.00 Filing fee reimbursement$27.00 Total award$8,050.40 Minus bond-$1,840.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$6,210.40
The Bond of $1,840.00 is to be released immediately to Oxygen.Co.Nz Limited As Agent For Ykm Trust Limited.
All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

The Tribunal must consider an application filed by the landlord against the tenant.
Only the landlord appeared at the hearing. I am satisfied that the tenant has been properly notified of the hearing, and therefore I will proceed to consider the claim in their absence.
The tenancy commenced on 29 July 2022, and the landlord states the tenancy was vacated on 6 August 2024. The landlord now claims costs for various expenses at the end of the tenancy, and rent arrears.

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations.
That includes a requirement that the party bringing the claim (the applicant), establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. The balance of probabilities means more likely than unlikely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely.
This obligation carried by the applicant is referred to as the “burden of proof”. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
As noted by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: ... [L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or 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.

RENT ARREARS

The landlord has applied for an order that the tenant pay rent arrears of $1315.70 being arrears as of 6 August 2024 being the end of the 28 day notice from the tenants terminating the tenancy.
The landlord has provided the Tribunal with a rent ledger. I have no reason to consider that record to be incorrect.
The landlord has established that the tenant is in arrears of the amount claimed, and that is ordered in full.

CLEANING AND RUBBISH REMOVAL

The Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) requires that the landlord provide the premises to the tenant at the start of the tenancy in a reasonable state of cleanliness (s45(1)(a)), and there is an equivalent obligation on the tenant to return the premises: ...in a reasonably clean and reasonably tidy condition, and remove or arrange for the removal from the premises of all rubbish.
It is important to note that the RTA does not require the premises to be provided/returned in an immaculate condition, only in a reasonably clean and tidy state. There is no scientific way to determine what is ‘reasonably’ clean and tidy, what is required is for the Tribunal to evaluate the evidence available (particularly photographs presented), and then to determine whether the premises would be reasonably clean. General cleaning
The landlord has claimed $641.13 for cleaning the premises. Having considered the photographs I am satisfied that the premises were not returned to the landlord reasonably clean. The invoice from the cleaner seems reasonable given the state of the premises. This claim is ordered in full. Carpet cleaning
The landlord’s photographs show stains on the carpet in a number of rooms, some of those stains are extensive and very obvious, the carpet was new at the start of the tenancy. The landlord incurred carpet cleaning costs of $747.50 supported by an invoice from Jae Carpet Cleaning. I am satisfied this staining occurred during the tenancy, so I order this claim in full. Garden work and rubbish removal
The photographs show that the grounds were not reasonably tidy, there were extensive weeds, leaves having accumulated and some rubbish. But my impression is that there was some maintenance undertaken also. Considering the photographs I order 75% of the gardening invoice cost, therefore order $439.88. Rubbish removal
The landlord provided photographs which show extensive rubbish left on the premises including a mattress, bedbase, old pallets, and old fridge, couch, and a volume of other white structures (I am not sure what they are). In any event the cost to remove this rubbish was $598.00, and that is ordered in full. Carpet stain treatment
During the tenancy, a stain was noted on the carpet. The tenant had tried to clean it unsuccessful, and the tenant approved the landlord calling a commercial cleaner. This incurred costs of $184.00, and I find the tenant must be liable for this cost as a cleaning cost incurred at the tenants request.

COMPENSATION

With any compensation claim, to receive an order the party must incur a loss. In short, the compensation is intended as best money can do, to compensate for the actual loss incurred.
Where a landlord claims compensation for damage caused by a tenant, the landlord must first prove the damage 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.
Where the damage is caused carelessly, the tenant's liability is limited to the lesser of the insurance excess or four weeks' rent.
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.
Damage is intentional where a person intends to cause damage and takes the necessary steps to achieve that purpose. Damage is also intentional when a person does something, or allows a situation to continue, knowing that damage is a certainty. See the High Court decision of Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541. Broken glass
The landlord has claimed for glazing to a bathroom window. I am satisfied this damage occurred during the tenancy, it is not fair wear and tear. The tenant has not proven it was not careless or intentional, so this claim is ordered in full. The invoice from The Glass Shoppe is $246.56, and is ordered in full. Curtain replacement
The landlord states the curtains were new throughout the tenancy when the tenancy commenced. The evidence is that there is extensive mould on the curtains, and the landlord’s position is that it was more costs effective to replace the curtains rather than clean them, I accept that is the case given the amount claimed. The replacement cost was $318.31, but once depreciation is applied (I have used the Inland Revenue Depreciation Guides, the IR 265) the amount ordered will be $238.74. Wall and door repairs
The landlord claims for holes in the walls and door. The photographs support this damage. I am satisfied this damage occurred during the tenancy, it is not fair wear and tear. The tenant has not proven it was not careless or intentional, so this claim is ordered in full. The invoice from Say Painting for the repair is $870.78. Garage door and lock replacement
The garage door was new at the start of the tenancy. The photographs show significant dents in the door. The landlord advised the key has been snapped in the lock. A quotation to replace the door and lock is $969.50. I accept that is proportionate to the damage. I am satisfied this damage occurred during the tenancy, it is not fair wear and tear. The tenant has not proven it was not careless or intentional, so this claim is ordered in full. Shower box damage
The landlord states that the shower was new at the start of the tenancy. The photographs show that there were marks on the bottom of the shower tray. Based on the photographs, it looks as though some of the coating on fibreglass / plastic tray has come off, probably around where the user would stand, and near the drain in the centre of the tray.
This is a difficult claim because while I accept the damage that occurred during the tenancy, I am not persuaded that the damage is proven by the landlord to be beyond fair wear and tear. It is possible the damage was caused by the tenants, but that is only a possibility. It is also possible that there was a defect in the shower tray to cause the appearance seen on the photograph. If there was a defect, then normal use would mean that the damage arose from fair wear and tear.
While I have received a quotation, I have not received any report from a suitably qualified person who had assessed the shower tray, to present a view as to what has caused the damage.
Ultimately the onus sits with the landlord to establish that this is not a maintenance or fair wear and tear issue, and I find on the evidence available the landlord has not established that situation, so this claim must be dismissed. Floor repair
The landlord seeks the cost to replace the flooring in the kitchen and laundry. The photographs show some rust to the floor, presumably under the washing machine and other areas. Otherwise the landlord states that the flooring had been damaged where the edges of the vinyl had parted, which the landlord questions if there had been flooding in the kitchen. The landlord has claimed $978.00 being the actual cost of the replacement vinyl.
At the end of the tenancy the vinyl was two years old. While I accept the joins have separated, there is no evidence before me from a suitably qualified person explaining how that occurred, and linking it to the tenant. The landlord has not persuaded me that this is not a maintenance issue. The landlord says there was possibly flooding, that may be the case but the evidence falls short of proving that, and explaining how flooding would have resulted in the need to replace vinyl flooring.
This claim has not been established so is dismissed. Carpet replacement
The landlord seeks costs to replace the carpet, the quotation is $2,153.00. I have noted the extensive staining above. In my assessment the staining is so extensive, that it must be viewed as intentional staining taking into consideration the cases I have noted in the general law above.
Again applying depreciation using the IR 265 guides, I order the tenant to pay $1,614.75. Electrician cost
The landlord received a request from the tenant to have an electrician come and fix the oven. As it turned out there was no problem with the oven, but the tenant had set the timer on the oven so it was not turning on. This is a cost incurred by the landlord which did not relate to any obligation the landlord had, such as maintenance. It was incurred at the request of the tenants, so the tenants must pay for that call-out fee. The invoice was $125.35, which is ordered in full.

LOCK AND KEY REPLACEMENT

The landlord has claimed compensation for lock and key replacement. Section 40 of the RTA sets out the tenant’s responsibilities, and that includes that at the end of the tenancy the tenant must “return to the landlord all keys, and security or pass cards or other such devices, provided by the landlord for use of the tenant”.
The tenant did not return all keys. The landlord had the keys replaced, and the tenant will be liable for the costs of replacing the missing keys, being $31.50

FILING FEE

The applicant has been mostly successful in their claim before the Tribunal. I find it is reasonable therefore to award the filing fee paid to commence the proceeding in the Tribunal, which is $27.00.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4993421 — Property damage at Unit/Flat 1, 1032 Fergusson Drive, Clouston Park, Upper

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4993421 — Property damage at Unit/Flat 1, 1032 Fergusson Drive, Clouston Park, Upper

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

RENT ARREARS

CLEANING AND RUBBISH REMOVAL

COMPENSATION

LOCK AND KEY REPLACEMENT

FILING FEE

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

RENT ARREARS

CLEANING AND RUBBISH REMOVAL

COMPENSATION

LOCK AND KEY REPLACEMENT

FILING FEE

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions