Published tribunal order
Tenancy Tribunal case 5016948 — Property damage at Unit/Flat Flat 8, 75 Wintere Road, Papatoetoe, Auckland
Decided 28 Apr 2025 · Published 28 Apr 2025 · Application 5016948
Landlord favoured
- Property damage
- Cleanliness
Order
Christopher Charles Snow must pay Linkpeople Limited $10,517.95 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
Reasons
- Only the landlord attended the hearing.
- The landlord has applied for compensation, and reimbursement of the filing fee following 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.
- The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish.
- 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.
- 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.
- The following damage was caused during the tenancy: glass between the bathroom and hallway, sliding door glass, walls, doors, curtains and blinds.
- The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
- The damage to the premises appears to have been caused intentionally.
- The amounts ordered are proved.
- I have taken into account 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. In calculating depreciation, I have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.