What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4998192 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] must pay [The landlord/s] $86.72 immediately, calculated as

How much money was awarded in case 4998192?

Property Damage: $250.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $280.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $56.72 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4998192?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4998192?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10847732-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4998192 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] must pay [The landlord/s] $86.72 immediately, calculated as

How much money was awarded in case 4998192?

Property Damage: $250.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $280.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $56.72 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4998192?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4998192?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10847732-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

59 McFadzean Drive, Blockhouse Bay, Auckland 0600 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4998192 — Property damage

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4998192 — net $86.72 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Repairs	$280.00		Repairs
Water rates	$56.72		Water rates
Exemplary damages: Bond		$250.00	Bond
Total award	$336.72	$250.00
Net award	$86.72
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$86.72

Order

[The tenant/s] must pay [The landlord/s] $86.72 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:
All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The tenants had the assistance of a mandarin interpreter.
The Tribunal had made an order on 19 January 2024 which terminated the tenancy, awarded rent arrears to 23 February 2024, and released the bond to reduce the award against the tenants. Tenant application
The tenants applied for refund of the bond, a work order, and exemplary damages in relation to the landlord’s failure to lodge the bond.
The tenants also referred to the landlord not paying tax on the rental income, but that issue is not one that this Tribunal can deal with.
The bond money was released by order of the Tribunal dated 19 January 2024.
The work order relates to the oven at the premises not working. The tenants claim that it never worked. The landlord said that it did work but the door did not shut completely. As the tenancy has ended a work order is no longer required and there is insufficient evidence to support any compensation for lack of amenity. Bond not lodged
[The tenant/s] claims the landlord has not lodged the bond with the Bond Centre within the required time.
A landlord must send any bond payment to the Bond Centre within 23 working days after the payment is received. See section 19(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $1,500.00. See section 19(2) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord acknowledged that he did not lodge the bond. I find they have 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 tenants paid bond money of $7,400.00. The landlord said that the bond was not lodged due to his negligence. He has had several tenants in this tenancy, and he has two other properties that are tenanted. The landlord is aware of the need to lodge the bond money with the Bond Centre.
The landlord said that the documents including the tenancy agreement were prepared in a hurry and he thought he had completed the necessary documents. He did not get the tenants to complete a bond lodgement form.
The landlord said that this was the only time that he has not lodged bond money and it would not happen again.
At the end of the tenancy the landlord did not release the bond money to the tenants because the fixed term tenancy ended early and he applied for rent arrears. The bond was released by the Tribunal in its order dated 19 January 2024.
It is in the public interest that landlord’s lodge the bond money with the Bond Centre. This ensures that any disputes can be dealt with by the Tribunal and then the bond money can be released accordingly. Not lodging the money means that one part retains control over it.
I consider that an award of $250.00 for exemplary damages against the landlord is reasonable. Landlord application
The landlord applied for payment of water bills and compensation for damage and cleaning.
The landlord applied for exemplary damages for defaming, slandering and making up false claims against him. Again, these are issues that this Tribunal cannot deal with. Compensation
The landlord said that he carried out the repairs himself as he could not afford to employ a contractor. The work involved removing a bracket on a bedroom wall, filling the holes and repainting one wall. The landlord said that this took him a whole 8-hour day to complete the work.
The landlord produced a quote which includes $650.00 plus GST to paint the walls.
Only one wall needed painting, and this was carried out by the landlord. I have estimated the cost of this to be $240.00 for labour ($30 per hour) and $40.00 for materials resulting in a total award of $280.00.
The landlord claimed for cleaning the garage and removing the tenant’s belongings. It is not clear what needed to be cleaned and removed as some of the items belonged to the landlord or were left for the landlord’s benefit. I note that the landlord had asked for the tenant to leave a mattress, but they had declined to.
The evidence is not clear to support an award for cleaning of the garage or rubbish removal. That part of the landlord’s claim is dismissed. Water
The landlord had claimed for water bills. The three invoices produced by the landlord cover the period from 4 October 2023 to 4 January 2024. The tenants left the tenancy on 17 November 2023. The landlord considers that the tenants should be liable for the water used up until the end of the fixed tenancy being 23 February 2024 as while the tenants were not living there the landlord still used the water for pool maintenance.
The invoices for water used in December and January are estimates only and therefore do not accurately show the amount of water used solely for the pool maintenance. I am therefore unable to award that part of the claim.
I accept that the tenants should pay for the water used up until 2 November 2023 as estimated in the invoice dated 2 November 2023. That invoice is $56.72 after the fixed charge is deducted. Filing fee and suppression
As both parties have had some success with their claims, I make no award for reimbursement of the filing fee.
For the same reason I suppress the names of the parties as sought.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4998192 — net $86.72 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Repairs	$280.00		Repairs
Water rates	$56.72		Water rates
Exemplary damages: Bond		$250.00	Bond
Total award	$336.72	$250.00
Net award	$86.72
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$86.72

Order

[The tenant/s] must pay [The landlord/s] $86.72 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:
All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The tenants had the assistance of a mandarin interpreter.
The Tribunal had made an order on 19 January 2024 which terminated the tenancy, awarded rent arrears to 23 February 2024, and released the bond to reduce the award against the tenants. Tenant application
The tenants applied for refund of the bond, a work order, and exemplary damages in relation to the landlord’s failure to lodge the bond.
The tenants also referred to the landlord not paying tax on the rental income, but that issue is not one that this Tribunal can deal with.
The bond money was released by order of the Tribunal dated 19 January 2024.
The work order relates to the oven at the premises not working. The tenants claim that it never worked. The landlord said that it did work but the door did not shut completely. As the tenancy has ended a work order is no longer required and there is insufficient evidence to support any compensation for lack of amenity. Bond not lodged
[The tenant/s] claims the landlord has not lodged the bond with the Bond Centre within the required time.
A landlord must send any bond payment to the Bond Centre within 23 working days after the payment is received. See section 19(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $1,500.00. See section 19(2) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord acknowledged that he did not lodge the bond. I find they have 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 tenants paid bond money of $7,400.00. The landlord said that the bond was not lodged due to his negligence. He has had several tenants in this tenancy, and he has two other properties that are tenanted. The landlord is aware of the need to lodge the bond money with the Bond Centre.
The landlord said that the documents including the tenancy agreement were prepared in a hurry and he thought he had completed the necessary documents. He did not get the tenants to complete a bond lodgement form.
The landlord said that this was the only time that he has not lodged bond money and it would not happen again.
At the end of the tenancy the landlord did not release the bond money to the tenants because the fixed term tenancy ended early and he applied for rent arrears. The bond was released by the Tribunal in its order dated 19 January 2024.
It is in the public interest that landlord’s lodge the bond money with the Bond Centre. This ensures that any disputes can be dealt with by the Tribunal and then the bond money can be released accordingly. Not lodging the money means that one part retains control over it.
I consider that an award of $250.00 for exemplary damages against the landlord is reasonable. Landlord application
The landlord applied for payment of water bills and compensation for damage and cleaning.
The landlord applied for exemplary damages for defaming, slandering and making up false claims against him. Again, these are issues that this Tribunal cannot deal with. Compensation
The landlord said that he carried out the repairs himself as he could not afford to employ a contractor. The work involved removing a bracket on a bedroom wall, filling the holes and repainting one wall. The landlord said that this took him a whole 8-hour day to complete the work.
The landlord produced a quote which includes $650.00 plus GST to paint the walls.
Only one wall needed painting, and this was carried out by the landlord. I have estimated the cost of this to be $240.00 for labour ($30 per hour) and $40.00 for materials resulting in a total award of $280.00.
The landlord claimed for cleaning the garage and removing the tenant’s belongings. It is not clear what needed to be cleaned and removed as some of the items belonged to the landlord or were left for the landlord’s benefit. I note that the landlord had asked for the tenant to leave a mattress, but they had declined to.
The evidence is not clear to support an award for cleaning of the garage or rubbish removal. That part of the landlord’s claim is dismissed. Water
The landlord had claimed for water bills. The three invoices produced by the landlord cover the period from 4 October 2023 to 4 January 2024. The tenants left the tenancy on 17 November 2023. The landlord considers that the tenants should be liable for the water used up until the end of the fixed tenancy being 23 February 2024 as while the tenants were not living there the landlord still used the water for pool maintenance.
The invoices for water used in December and January are estimates only and therefore do not accurately show the amount of water used solely for the pool maintenance. I am therefore unable to award that part of the claim.
I accept that the tenants should pay for the water used up until 2 November 2023 as estimated in the invoice dated 2 November 2023. That invoice is $56.72 after the fixed charge is deducted. Filing fee and suppression
As both parties have had some success with their claims, I make no award for reimbursement of the filing fee.
For the same reason I suppress the names of the parties as sought.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4998192 — Property damage at 59 McFadzean Drive, Blockhouse Bay, Auckland 0600

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4998192 — Property damage at 59 McFadzean Drive, Blockhouse Bay, Auckland 0600

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions