What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5006124?

The tribunal order states: Kayla Ashlee Clark must pay Hillary Posthuma $6,594.00 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 5006124?

Cleaning: $241.50 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Compensation: $920.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $265.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,510.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Carpet: $800.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Shower Curtain: $55.04 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $225.46 awarded to landlord; Smoke Alarms: $50.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5006124?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Exemplary damages, Cleanliness, Smoke alarms.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5006124?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10991988-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5006124?

The tribunal order states: Kayla Ashlee Clark must pay Hillary Posthuma $6,594.00 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 5006124?

Cleaning: $241.50 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Compensation: $920.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $265.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,510.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Carpet: $800.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Shower Curtain: $55.04 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $225.46 awarded to landlord; Smoke Alarms: $50.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5006124?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Exemplary damages, Cleanliness, Smoke alarms.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5006124?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10991988-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

36 Cambridge Street, Levin, Levin 5510 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5006124 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

36 Cambridge Street, Levin, Levin 5510 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5006124 — Rent arrears | 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 5006124 — net $6,594.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$2,510.00	Rent arrears
Carpet Cleaning	$241.50	Carpet Cleaning
Cleaning: and rubbish removal	$1,000.00	Cleaning: and rubbish removal
Rubbish removal: rubbish dump fees	$225.46	Rubbish removal: rubbish dump fees
Lawns and Garden work	$265.00	Lawns and Garden work
Replace smoke alarms	$50.00	Replace smoke alarms
Replace furnishings: shower curtain	$55.04	Replace furnishings: shower curtain
Replace furnishings: carpet	$800.00	Replace furnishings: carpet
Exemplary damages	$500.00	Exemplary damages
Compensation	$920.00	Compensation
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$6,594.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$6,594.00

Claims and awards for application 5006124 — net $6,594.00 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears

Amount: $2,510.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears

Carpet Cleaning

Amount: $241.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Carpet Cleaning

Cleaning: and rubbish removal

Amount: $1,000.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning: and rubbish removal

Rubbish removal: rubbish dump fees

Amount: $225.46
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal: rubbish dump fees

Lawns and Garden work

Amount: $265.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lawns and Garden work

Dismissed claims

Changing The Locks

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Carpet Cleaning Rubbish Removal Compensation Exemplary damages Filing Fee Lawns And Garden Work Rent arrears Replace Smoke Alarms

Order

Kayla Ashlee Clark must pay Hillary Posthuma $6,594.00 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below. DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears$2,510.00 Carpet Cleaning$241.50 Cleaning: and rubbish removal$1,000.00 Rubbish removal: rubbish dump fees$225.46 Lawns and Garden work$265.00 Replace smoke alarms$50.00 Replace furnishings: shower curtain$55.04 Replace furnishings: carpet$800.00 Exemplary damages$500.00 Compensation$920.00 Filing fee reimbursement$27.00 Total award$6,594.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$6,594.00

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not attend the hearing.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 15 August 2024. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.

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 (“RTA”).
The landlord provided photographic evidence that tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. The photographs indicated that the tenant had taken what she wanted from the property, left an extensive amount of rubbish in and around the property and had made no attempt to clean the property or tend to the lawns and garden.
The tenant had installed an above-ground swimming pool that had killed the lawn. It is appropriate that the landlord be compensated for re-sowing this area.
The carpet was extensively stained throughout the house and so the cost of having these stains removed is awarded to the landlord.
The tenant returned the keys and so the landlord’s claim for changing the locks is dismissed.
The following chattels were missing at the end of the tenancy: a smoke alarm and the shower curtain.
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.
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.
A large stain on the carpet of one room could not be removed. The landlord advised that because the damage was in the doorway, it could not be patched and the carpet had to be replaced.
Given the widespread extent and nature of the carpet staining throughout the property, this was intentional damage.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
I have considered 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.
The landlord advised that the carpet was new in 2020. The photographs indicate that it was in good condition. This is a situation where it is appropriate that the landlord be reimbursed for almost the full amount of replacement as the carpets were in “as new condition” and the amount claimed is modest.
The amounts ordered are proved. Compensation
The landlord claimed compensation for loss of rent due to the period it took to restore the property to a sufficiently clean and tidy condition so that it could be rented.
The landlord gave evidence that it had arranged for a tenant to rent the property from 17 August 2024, two days after the end of the tenancy. However, because the property was left in such an unclean condition, littered with rubbish and requiring extensive cleaning of the carpets and the eventual replacement of carpet in one room, the tenant could not move in on that date and could not wait while the property was put into a reasonably clean and tidy condition.
The landlord confirmed that a new tenancy did not start until 18 September 2024.
A landlord can be expected to have a period of vacancy between tenancies where no rent is earned. However, it is appropriate for a tenant to compensate a landlord where they have left the property in such a state that it could not be let out and it takes a longer period for the landlord to get the property up to the necessary standard. Such loss is reasonably foreseeable where a tenant walks away from a property leaving it in a filthy state and burdened with a substantial amount of rubbish. It was a direct consequence of the tenant’s failure to discharge her duty under section 40(1)(e)(ii) and (iii) RTA.
The landlord has persuaded the Tribunal that in this particular case, it is appropriate to award him compensation for the delay caused by the tenant’s failure to clear and clean the property. A sum of two weeks’ rental at the rate being paid by the new tenant is awarded. Exemplary damages
The landlord claims the tenant has removed or interfered with the smoke alarms.
A tenant must not cause or permit any interference with, or render inoperative, any means of escape from fire within the meaning of the Building Act 2004. See section 40(2)(ab) RTA. The definition of “means of escape” includes “all active and passive protection features required to warn people of fire...”, which covers smoke alarms.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $4,000.00. See section 40(3A)(b) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord gave evidence that one smoke alarm was missing from the property at the end of the tenancy. I find that the tenant has committed an unlawful act by removing the smoke alarm.
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied that 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 Tribunal is satisfied that it is just to award exemplary damages because: a. The tenant left behind plenty of items that she did not want and took the items she wished to keep. The smoke alarm was removed intentionally. b. While the landlord suffered no physical detriment, it is a statutory requirement that smoke alarms be installed and maintained and the absence of a smoke alarm may have had an impact on the landlord’s insurance. c. It is necessary for the Tribunal to deter tenants from removing smoke alarms because of the danger such removal poses and to uphold the intention of Parliament in providing smoke alarm regulations and determining that a breach of this provision should be sanctioned by awarding exemplary damages.
It is appropriate in these circumstances to award the landlord exemplary damages of $500.00 which is at the lower end of the amount which the Tribunal can award.
Because the landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed 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 5006124 — net $6,594.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$2,510.00	Rent arrears
Carpet Cleaning	$241.50	Carpet Cleaning
Cleaning: and rubbish removal	$1,000.00	Cleaning: and rubbish removal
Rubbish removal: rubbish dump fees	$225.46	Rubbish removal: rubbish dump fees
Lawns and Garden work	$265.00	Lawns and Garden work
Replace smoke alarms	$50.00	Replace smoke alarms
Replace furnishings: shower curtain	$55.04	Replace furnishings: shower curtain
Replace furnishings: carpet	$800.00	Replace furnishings: carpet
Exemplary damages	$500.00	Exemplary damages
Compensation	$920.00	Compensation
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$6,594.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$6,594.00

Claims and awards for application 5006124 — net $6,594.00 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears

Amount: $2,510.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears

Carpet Cleaning

Amount: $241.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Carpet Cleaning

Cleaning: and rubbish removal

Amount: $1,000.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning: and rubbish removal

Rubbish removal: rubbish dump fees

Amount: $225.46
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal: rubbish dump fees

Lawns and Garden work

Amount: $265.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lawns and Garden work

Dismissed claims

Changing The Locks

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Carpet Cleaning Rubbish Removal Compensation Exemplary damages Filing Fee Lawns And Garden Work Rent arrears Replace Smoke Alarms

Order

Kayla Ashlee Clark must pay Hillary Posthuma $6,594.00 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below. DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears$2,510.00 Carpet Cleaning$241.50 Cleaning: and rubbish removal$1,000.00 Rubbish removal: rubbish dump fees$225.46 Lawns and Garden work$265.00 Replace smoke alarms$50.00 Replace furnishings: shower curtain$55.04 Replace furnishings: carpet$800.00 Exemplary damages$500.00 Compensation$920.00 Filing fee reimbursement$27.00 Total award$6,594.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$6,594.00

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not attend the hearing.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 15 August 2024. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.

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 (“RTA”).
The landlord provided photographic evidence that tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. The photographs indicated that the tenant had taken what she wanted from the property, left an extensive amount of rubbish in and around the property and had made no attempt to clean the property or tend to the lawns and garden.
The tenant had installed an above-ground swimming pool that had killed the lawn. It is appropriate that the landlord be compensated for re-sowing this area.
The carpet was extensively stained throughout the house and so the cost of having these stains removed is awarded to the landlord.
The tenant returned the keys and so the landlord’s claim for changing the locks is dismissed.
The following chattels were missing at the end of the tenancy: a smoke alarm and the shower curtain.
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.
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.
A large stain on the carpet of one room could not be removed. The landlord advised that because the damage was in the doorway, it could not be patched and the carpet had to be replaced.
Given the widespread extent and nature of the carpet staining throughout the property, this was intentional damage.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
I have considered 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.
The landlord advised that the carpet was new in 2020. The photographs indicate that it was in good condition. This is a situation where it is appropriate that the landlord be reimbursed for almost the full amount of replacement as the carpets were in “as new condition” and the amount claimed is modest.
The amounts ordered are proved. Compensation
The landlord claimed compensation for loss of rent due to the period it took to restore the property to a sufficiently clean and tidy condition so that it could be rented.
The landlord gave evidence that it had arranged for a tenant to rent the property from 17 August 2024, two days after the end of the tenancy. However, because the property was left in such an unclean condition, littered with rubbish and requiring extensive cleaning of the carpets and the eventual replacement of carpet in one room, the tenant could not move in on that date and could not wait while the property was put into a reasonably clean and tidy condition.
The landlord confirmed that a new tenancy did not start until 18 September 2024.
A landlord can be expected to have a period of vacancy between tenancies where no rent is earned. However, it is appropriate for a tenant to compensate a landlord where they have left the property in such a state that it could not be let out and it takes a longer period for the landlord to get the property up to the necessary standard. Such loss is reasonably foreseeable where a tenant walks away from a property leaving it in a filthy state and burdened with a substantial amount of rubbish. It was a direct consequence of the tenant’s failure to discharge her duty under section 40(1)(e)(ii) and (iii) RTA.
The landlord has persuaded the Tribunal that in this particular case, it is appropriate to award him compensation for the delay caused by the tenant’s failure to clear and clean the property. A sum of two weeks’ rental at the rate being paid by the new tenant is awarded. Exemplary damages
The landlord claims the tenant has removed or interfered with the smoke alarms.
A tenant must not cause or permit any interference with, or render inoperative, any means of escape from fire within the meaning of the Building Act 2004. See section 40(2)(ab) RTA. The definition of “means of escape” includes “all active and passive protection features required to warn people of fire...”, which covers smoke alarms.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $4,000.00. See section 40(3A)(b) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord gave evidence that one smoke alarm was missing from the property at the end of the tenancy. I find that the tenant has committed an unlawful act by removing the smoke alarm.
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied that 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 Tribunal is satisfied that it is just to award exemplary damages because: a. The tenant left behind plenty of items that she did not want and took the items she wished to keep. The smoke alarm was removed intentionally. b. While the landlord suffered no physical detriment, it is a statutory requirement that smoke alarms be installed and maintained and the absence of a smoke alarm may have had an impact on the landlord’s insurance. c. It is necessary for the Tribunal to deter tenants from removing smoke alarms because of the danger such removal poses and to uphold the intention of Parliament in providing smoke alarm regulations and determining that a breach of this provision should be sanctioned by awarding exemplary damages.
It is appropriate in these circumstances to award the landlord exemplary damages of $500.00 which is at the lower end of the amount which the Tribunal can award.
Because the landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5006124 — Rent arrears at 36 Cambridge Street, Levin, Levin 5510

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5006124 — Rent arrears at 36 Cambridge Street, Levin, Levin 5510

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

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?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

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?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions