What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5003928 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes And

How much money was awarded in case 5003928?

Fence Removed From The Property: $4,000.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5003928?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5003928?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11592058-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5003928 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes And

How much money was awarded in case 5003928?

Fence Removed From The Property: $4,000.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5003928?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5003928?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11592058-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

10 Wellbeing Close, Woodhill, Whangarei 0110 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5003928 — Tenancy dispute

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5003928 — net $4,000.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Fence removed from the property	$4,000.00	Fence removed from the property
Net award	$4,000.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,000.00

The landlord attended the hearing which was held by teleconference. The Tribunal was unable to contact the tenant on the contact number provided. I am satisfied that adequate service of the hearing notice had been completed and deemed it reasonable to proceed with the hearing in the tenant’s absence.

The landlord has applied for compensation following the end of the tenancy.

Under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), a tenant has an obligation to return the rental property in a condition that is substantially the same as when they commenced the tenancy, subject to fair wear and tear. Section 40(2)(a) of the Act explicitly states that a tenant must not intentionally or carelessly damage the premises. The removal of the trellis privacy screen, which belonged to the landlord, constitutes damage to the property, as it altered a structure that was part of the landlord’s premises.

The evidence provided by the landlord, including the inspection report from March 2024, photographs showing the trellis screen in place, and the final inspection report from July 2024 demonstrating its removal, supports the claim that the tenant was responsible for the change. The landlord further substantiated the loss with a work order and invoice for reinstating the trellis. The tenant was given the opportunity to return the materials but failed to do so. This failure to mitigate the loss by returning the materials strengthens the landlord’s claim for compensation, as the tenant’s actions directly resulted in the need for replacement.

While the compensation amount of $4,000 may seem high, it appears to be a reasonable and justifiable cost to reinstate the trellis screen. The RTA allows a landlord to claim compensation for damage, provided they can prove the loss and its cost. In this case, the landlord has provided clear evidence of both. Additionally, the tenant’s failure to comply with the landlord’s request to return the materials demonstrates a lack of effort to minimise the financial impact, further justifying the claim.

Given the above considerations, the claim for $4,000 is proven and reasonable. The tenant breached their obligations under the RTA by removing a fixture that was not theirs to alter. The landlord has met the evidentiary burden by providing documentation supporting the cost of reinstatement, and the claim aligns with the legal framework under the RTA. Consequently, the landlord is entitled to full compensation for the loss incurred.

I have considered the principles of betterment and depreciation, however, they do not apply in this case, as the fence was newly installed during the tenancy and therefore had not depreciated in value.

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5003928 — net $4,000.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Fence removed from the property	$4,000.00	Fence removed from the property
Net award	$4,000.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,000.00

The landlord has applied for compensation following the end of the tenancy.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5003928 — Tenancy dispute at 10 Wellbeing Close, Woodhill, Whangarei 0110

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5003928 — Tenancy dispute at 10 Wellbeing Close, Woodhill, Whangarei 0110

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Property management

Frequently asked questions