What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5031829?

The tribunal order states: Mereana Marupo must pay Cartel Trading Limited $3,262.88 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 5031829?

Cleaning: $90.07 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lightbulbs: $7.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $275.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $931.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $970.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $199.70 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $66.29 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $95.82 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $600.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5031829?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5031829?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11451764-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5031829?

The tribunal order states: Mereana Marupo must pay Cartel Trading Limited $3,262.88 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 5031829?

Cleaning: $90.07 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lightbulbs: $7.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $275.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $931.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $970.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $199.70 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $66.29 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $95.82 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $600.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5031829?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5031829?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11451764-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

83 Bairds Road, Otara, Auckland 2023 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5031829 — Property damage

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5031829 — net $3,262.88 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Lock/key replacement	$275.00	Lock/key replacement
Window repairs	$931.50	Window repairs
Light bulbs/batteries	$7.50	Light bulbs/batteries
Cleaning	$90.07	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$600.00	Rubbish removal
Repairs to walls	$970.00	Repairs to walls
Repairs to door	$199.70	Repairs to door
Repairs to subfloor vents	$66.29	Repairs to subfloor vents
Repair and redecorate kitchen cupboards	$95.82	Repair and redecorate kitchen cupboards
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,262.88
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,262.88

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not attend at the scheduled time.

Because I am satisfied the tenant has been served notice of the hearing in accordance with the Residential Tenancies Act, 1986 and the tenant has not requested an adjournment, the hearing was conducted in the tenant’s absence.

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 must also replace standard light bulbs.

At the end of the tenancy the premises required cleaning of the kitchen and the oven, and the removal of mould from some walls in order to bring the premises up to a reasonably clean and tidy standard.

The tenant also did not return keys for the premises. Because of this the landlord replaced the locks.

Rubbish was left outside the premises. The landlord claimed $948.10 for removal of 1,600 kilograms of rubbish. The photographs do not disclose this amount of rubbish and I have awarded an amount that I believe is reasonable to meet the evidence I see today.

The landlord provided invoices and photographs which prove the amounts awarded.

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 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 landlord provided photographs that show holes were made in many of the walls in the premises, and scratches to the paint on the kitchen cupboard doors. The landlord also provided invoices for $1,212.05 and $136.89 respectively for these repairs.

This is an older style house that still has many original fittings. After a four-year tenancy such as this, a landlord can expect some wear and tear and the need for redecorating. Although the holes far exceed fair wear and tear, I have reduced the amount awarded to account for the fact that some painting and decorating would have been needed in any case.

The landlord also provided photographs and invoices in respect of broken windows, the removal of subfloor vents outside and an internal door that had been kicked in.

The tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The nature and extent of the damage persuades me that whereas some of it may be careless damage, most of itt is intentional damage.

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.

Because the landlord has been substantially successful in their claim, I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5031829 — net $3,262.88 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Lock/key replacement	$275.00	Lock/key replacement
Window repairs	$931.50	Window repairs
Light bulbs/batteries	$7.50	Light bulbs/batteries
Cleaning	$90.07	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$600.00	Rubbish removal
Repairs to walls	$970.00	Repairs to walls
Repairs to door	$199.70	Repairs to door
Repairs to subfloor vents	$66.29	Repairs to subfloor vents
Repair and redecorate kitchen cupboards	$95.82	Repair and redecorate kitchen cupboards
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,262.88
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,262.88

Order

Mereana Marupo must pay Cartel Trading Limited $3,262.88 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not attend at the scheduled time.
Because I am satisfied the tenant has been served notice of the hearing in accordance with the Residential Tenancies Act, 1986 and the tenant has not requested an adjournment, the hearing was conducted in the tenant’s absence.
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 must also replace standard light bulbs.
At the end of the tenancy the premises required cleaning of the kitchen and the oven, and the removal of mould from some walls in order to bring the premises up to a reasonably clean and tidy standard.
The tenant also did not return keys for the premises. Because of this the landlord replaced the locks.
Rubbish was left outside the premises. The landlord claimed $948.10 for removal of 1,600 kilograms of rubbish. The photographs do not disclose this amount of rubbish and I have awarded an amount that I believe is reasonable to meet the evidence I see today.
The landlord provided invoices and photographs which prove the amounts awarded.

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 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 landlord provided photographs that show holes were made in many of the walls in the premises, and scratches to the paint on the kitchen cupboard doors. The landlord also provided invoices for $1,212.05 and $136.89 respectively for these repairs.
This is an older style house that still has many original fittings. After a four-year tenancy such as this, a landlord can expect some wear and tear and the need for redecorating. Although the holes far exceed fair wear and tear, I have reduced the amount awarded to account for the fact that some painting and decorating would have been needed in any case.
The landlord also provided photographs and invoices in respect of broken windows, the removal of subfloor vents outside and an internal door that had been kicked in.
The tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The nature and extent of the damage persuades me that whereas some of it may be careless damage, most of itt is intentional damage.
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.
Because the landlord has been substantially successful in their claim, I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5031829 — Property damage at 83 Bairds Road, Otara, Auckland 2023

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5031829 — Property damage at 83 Bairds Road, Otara, Auckland 2023

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

Property management

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions