How much money was awarded in case 5030848?

Property Damage: $400.00 awarded to landlord; Door Frame: $287.50 awarded to landlord; Front Door: $287.50 awarded to landlord; Lounge Ceiling: $400.00 awarded to landlord; Microwave Cabinet: $316.25 awarded to landlord; Pantry Door: $400.00 awarded to landlord; Towel Rail: $264.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5030848?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5030848?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11515133-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5030848?

Property Damage: $400.00 awarded to landlord; Door Frame: $287.50 awarded to landlord; Front Door: $287.50 awarded to landlord; Lounge Ceiling: $400.00 awarded to landlord; Microwave Cabinet: $316.25 awarded to landlord; Pantry Door: $400.00 awarded to landlord; Towel Rail: $264.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5030848?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5030848?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11515133-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5030848 — Property damage

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5030848 about?

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

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5030848 — net $1,832.79 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Insurance excess on damage	$400.00	Insurance excess on damage
Repairs: pantry door	$400.00	Repairs: pantry door
Repairs: lounge ceiling	$400.00	Repairs: lounge ceiling
Repairs: front door	$287.50	Repairs: front door
Repairs: Towel rail	$264.50	n each. The remaining damage for the front door ($287.50), towel rail and door ($264.50), door frame ($287.50) and microwave cabinet ($316.25) are below the ex…
Repairs: Door frame	$287.50	Repairs: Door frame
Repairs: Microwave cabinet	$316.25	Repairs: Microwave cabinet
Net award	$1,832.79
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,832.79

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name and identifying details.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $522.96 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Mele Hoko Finau must pay [The landlord/s] $1,832.79 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:

Reasons

The landlord attended the video hearing.

The tenant did not attend the hearing by Teams video link or respond to telephone calls from the Tribunal. The Tribunal may hear matters in the absence of a party where satisfied that notice of the hearing has been given. I am satisfied that notice has been given.

This matter was part heard on 10 December 2024 and orders were made terminating the tenancy, rent arrears, lock charges and for reimbursement of the filing fee. The hearing was adjourned for the landlord to file further information regarding compensation and insurance.

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 careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.

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. The landlord is insured. The policy carries an excess of $400.00 on each and every claim.

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.

The following damage was caused during the tenancy: security screen, floor plank, mould, broken window and damaged walls. An insurance claim was lodged by the landlord and accepted. The landlord was required to pay an excess of $400.00.The tenant is ordered to pay $400.00.

Further damage was subsequently discovered and the landlord provided photos and a quote for repairs in support of the claim. The claims relating to the pantry door, kitchen doors, lounge ceiling and walls both exceeded the amount of the excess. As the excess will be applicable to each claim, I have ordered the tenant to pay $400.00 on each. The remaining damage for the front door ($287.50), towel rail and door ($264.50), door frame ($287.50) and microwave cabinet ($316.25) are below the excess. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The amounts ordered are proved.

Both parties applied for name suppression. The landlord has been substantially successful and suppression of the landlord name and details is ordered. The tenant has not been wholly or substantially successful and the application for suppression is dismissed.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5030848 — net $1,832.79 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Insurance excess on damage	$400.00	Insurance excess on damage
Repairs: pantry door	$400.00	Repairs: pantry door
Repairs: lounge ceiling	$400.00	Repairs: lounge ceiling
Repairs: front door	$287.50	Repairs: front door
Repairs: Towel rail	$264.50	n each. The remaining damage for the front door ($287.50), towel rail and door ($264.50), door frame ($287.50) and microwave cabinet ($316.25) are below the ex…
Repairs: Door frame	$287.50	Repairs: Door frame
Repairs: Microwave cabinet	$316.25	Repairs: Microwave cabinet
Net award	$1,832.79
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,832.79

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name and identifying details.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $522.96 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.
Mele Hoko Finau must pay [The landlord/s] $1,832.79 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:

Reasons

The landlord attended the video hearing.
The tenant did not attend the hearing by Teams video link or respond to telephone calls from the Tribunal. The Tribunal may hear matters in the absence of a party where satisfied that notice of the hearing has been given. I am satisfied that notice has been given.
This matter was part heard on 10 December 2024 and orders were made terminating the tenancy, rent arrears, lock charges and for reimbursement of the filing fee. The hearing was adjourned for the landlord to file further information regarding compensation and insurance.

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 careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.
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. The landlord is insured. The policy carries an excess of $400.00 on each and every claim.
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.
The following damage was caused during the tenancy: security screen, floor plank, mould, broken window and damaged walls. An insurance claim was lodged by the landlord and accepted. The landlord was required to pay an excess of $400.00.The tenant is ordered to pay $400.00.
Further damage was subsequently discovered and the landlord provided photos and a quote for repairs in support of the claim. The claims relating to the pantry door, kitchen doors, lounge ceiling and walls both exceeded the amount of the excess. As the excess will be applicable to each claim, I have ordered the tenant to pay $400.00 on each. The remaining damage for the front door ($287.50), towel rail and door ($264.50), door frame ($287.50) and microwave cabinet ($316.25) are below the excess. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved.
Both parties applied for name suppression. The landlord has been substantially successful and suppression of the landlord name and details is ordered. The tenant has not been wholly or substantially successful and the application for suppression is dismissed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5030848 — Property damage

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5030848 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions