What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5012568 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

How much money was awarded in case 5012568?

Cleaning: $300.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 4910534 D…: $1,406.01 awarded to landlord; Door Handle: $69.00 awarded to landlord; Walls, door and floor - incl repaint…: $1,840.00 awarded to landlord; Smoke Alarms: $92.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $172.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5012568?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness, Smoke alarms.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5012568?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11318137-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5012568 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

How much money was awarded in case 5012568?

Cleaning: $300.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 4910534 D…: $1,406.01 awarded to landlord; Door Handle: $69.00 awarded to landlord; Walls, door and floor - incl repaint…: $1,840.00 awarded to landlord; Smoke Alarms: $92.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $172.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5012568?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness, Smoke alarms.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5012568?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11318137-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5012568 — Property damage

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5012568 — net $3,338.51 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Previous order application 4910534 dated 02/08/2024	$1,406.01	Previous order application 4910534 dated 02/08/2024
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Rubbish removal	$172.50	Rubbish removal
Repairs: Walls, door and floor - incl repainting	$1,840.00	Repairs: Walls, door and floor - incl repainting
Replace smoke alarms: 2	$92.00	Replace smoke alarms: 2
Repairs: Door handle	$69.00	Repairs: Door handle
Cleaning	$300.00	Cleaning
Net award	$3,338.51
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,338.51

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord name and identifying details.
Mareshah Candy Edmonds must pay [The landlord/s] $3,338.51 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 2 August 2024 under application 5012568.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $568.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing, conducted via teleconference. 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 landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The tenancy was ended on 5 August 2024 via a Tribunal order.

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.
The tenant did not leave all of the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. The landlord provided photos and invoices that establish the need for some further cleaning and rubbish removal. A review of the photos versus the cleaning invoices indicated the clean was to a standard higher than that required of a tenant at exit.
The statutory requirement is that tenants leave the premises in a reasonably clean and reasonably tidy condition. The RTA allows for fair wear and tear. A tenant is not required to leave a property spotless or even in a condition where the landlord would be happy to rent it out to a new tenant. What is required is that premises including the stove and bathroom fittings are cleaned and all personal items removed. A tenant is not required to rigorously clean all walls, ceilings lightshades, skirtings, behind appliances or the outside of the house. It is common that a landlord wishes to clean to this “extra” level so that they can re-tenant or sell. However, that is a business decision that a landlord makes at their cost.
Having reviewed the evidence, I award $300.00 as tenant contribution towards the invoice of $678.50. The cost of rubbish removal is reasonable and awarded in full.
The landlord had to replace two smoke alarms at a cost of $92.00.
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 1 . 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.
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. Door handle broken. This required replacement at a cost of $69.00. b. Damage and a series of small holes in the walls of the living room and bedrooms. The repairs required subsequent repainting of the damaged areas. The cost of this (and the door repair below) was $1,840.00. c. Damage to the internal ensuite door.
The damage above is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved. 1 “Fair wear” is deterioration caused by the reasonable use of the premises. “Fair tear” is deterioration caused by the ordinary operation of the forces of nature. Importantly, intentional or careless damage are not fair wear and tear. The landlord must prove that damage is beyond fair wear and tear for compensation.
I decline the claim for the blind repair as the landlord is unable to establish the damage as more than fair wear and tear.
I have considered possible betterment and depreciation but consider neither are applicable in this instance. The house was a new build in 2021. 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. Prior order
On 2 August 2024 the Tribunal made an order relating to this tenancy, for rent arrears and termination. The previous order is incorporated into this order for enforcement purposes. Filing fee
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. Suppression
Section 95A RTA states regarding suppression orders that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
The landlord requested suppression in its application. As it has been substantially successful, suppression is ordered.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5012568 — net $3,338.51 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Previous order application 4910534 dated 02/08/2024	$1,406.01	Previous order application 4910534 dated 02/08/2024
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Rubbish removal	$172.50	Rubbish removal
Repairs: Walls, door and floor - incl repainting	$1,840.00	Repairs: Walls, door and floor - incl repainting
Replace smoke alarms: 2	$92.00	Replace smoke alarms: 2
Repairs: Door handle	$69.00	Repairs: Door handle
Cleaning	$300.00	Cleaning
Net award	$3,338.51
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,338.51

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord name and identifying details.
Mareshah Candy Edmonds must pay [The landlord/s] $3,338.51 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 2 August 2024 under application 5012568.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $568.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing, conducted via teleconference. 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 landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The tenancy was ended on 5 August 2024 via a Tribunal order.

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.
The tenant did not leave all of the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. The landlord provided photos and invoices that establish the need for some further cleaning and rubbish removal. A review of the photos versus the cleaning invoices indicated the clean was to a standard higher than that required of a tenant at exit.
The statutory requirement is that tenants leave the premises in a reasonably clean and reasonably tidy condition. The RTA allows for fair wear and tear. A tenant is not required to leave a property spotless or even in a condition where the landlord would be happy to rent it out to a new tenant. What is required is that premises including the stove and bathroom fittings are cleaned and all personal items removed. A tenant is not required to rigorously clean all walls, ceilings lightshades, skirtings, behind appliances or the outside of the house. It is common that a landlord wishes to clean to this “extra” level so that they can re-tenant or sell. However, that is a business decision that a landlord makes at their cost.
Having reviewed the evidence, I award $300.00 as tenant contribution towards the invoice of $678.50. The cost of rubbish removal is reasonable and awarded in full.
The landlord had to replace two smoke alarms at a cost of $92.00.
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 1 . 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.
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. Door handle broken. This required replacement at a cost of $69.00. b. Damage and a series of small holes in the walls of the living room and bedrooms. The repairs required subsequent repainting of the damaged areas. The cost of this (and the door repair below) was $1,840.00. c. Damage to the internal ensuite door.
The damage above is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved. 1 “Fair wear” is deterioration caused by the reasonable use of the premises. “Fair tear” is deterioration caused by the ordinary operation of the forces of nature. Importantly, intentional or careless damage are not fair wear and tear. The landlord must prove that damage is beyond fair wear and tear for compensation.
I decline the claim for the blind repair as the landlord is unable to establish the damage as more than fair wear and tear.
I have considered possible betterment and depreciation but consider neither are applicable in this instance. The house was a new build in 2021. 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. Prior order
On 2 August 2024 the Tribunal made an order relating to this tenancy, for rent arrears and termination. The previous order is incorporated into this order for enforcement purposes. Filing fee
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. Suppression
Section 95A RTA states regarding suppression orders that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
The landlord requested suppression in its application. As it has been substantially successful, suppression is ordered.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5012568 — Property damage

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5012568 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Order

Reasons

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