How much money was awarded in case 5041132?

Enterprises: $27.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5041132?

The primary dispute was Mould & damp.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5041132?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11279501-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5041132?

Enterprises: $27.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5041132?

The primary dispute was Mould & damp.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5041132?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11279501-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat D3, 193 Riccarton Road, Riccarton, Christchurch Tenancy Tribunal Case 5041132 — Mould & damp

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5041132 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] must carry out the following work to the premises, which must be

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5041132. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Enterprises	$27.00		Enterprises

[The tenant/s] must carry out the following work to the premises, which must be completed by Tuesday 14 January 2025: a. Clean the windows and blinds in both bedrooms of all mould and grime to a reasonably clean and tidy standard. b. Clean the shower of all mould and grime to a reasonably clean and tidy standard. c. Clean the oven to a reasonably clean and tidy standard.

As an alternative to compliance with Order 2, the tenant must pay the landlord $500 immediately.

If the tenant fails to comply with either Order 2 or 3 above, then the landlord may undertake the work and charge the tenant the costs of this work up to $500. These costs may be treated as rent in arrears and enforced accordingly.

[The tenant/s] must pay The Property Boss Limited As Agent For Searle Enterprises $27.00 immediately, being reimbursement of the filing fee.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing represented by Ms Horne.

Mr Reweti did not attend and did not answer the calls made to his phone during the hearing. He had been notified of the hearing by email and text, accordingly pursuant to section 92 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) the hearing continued in his absence.

The landlord claims that Mr Reweti has failed to keep the property reasonably clean and tidy, in particular the windows, blinds, shower and oven. The landlord wants the problem fixed.

Under section 40(c) of the RTA, a tenant must keep the tenancy premises reasonably clean and reasonably tidy.

Where the Tribunal finds the tenant has failed to comply with any of these obligations, where appropriate it may make an order for the landlord to carry out the work. See section 78(1)(e) RTA.

If the work order is not being made by consent of both parties, the Tribunal must also make a monetary order as an alternative to compliance with the work order. See sections 78(2) and 78(2AA) RTA.

A work order may also authorise the landlord to undertake the work and charge the tenant the costs of doing the work, if the tenant should fail to comply with the work order and alternative monetary order. A monetary limit must be imposed by the Tribunal on the amount of costs that can be charged. These costs can be treated as rent in arrears and enforced accordingly. See sections 78(2AAB) and 78(2AAC)(a) RTA.

The landlord has provided photos that establish that Mr Reweti is breaching section 40(c) of the RTA. In particular he is allowing significant mould to grow on the shower, windows, blinds and curtains, and the oven is very dirty. He was issued a notice to remedy the areas on 2 October but has failed to comply with it.

The landlord’s oral and pictorial evidence is that the situation is getting worse as the mould is being left unattended.

Having considered the evidence, I find it appropriate to make a work order. Mr Reweti therefore has a week to clean the areas noted in the landlord’s notice of 2 October. If he fails to do so, the landlord may bring in their own cleaners to rectify the areas and pass the cost on to Mr Reweti. The landlord is to assess Mr Reweti’s compliance with this order at a notified inspection after 14 January.

To be clear to both parties, the assessment of what is reasonably clean and tidy is an objective one. The areas are not required to be perfectly clean but do need to be wiped of mould and debris.

Because The Property Boss Limited As Agent For Searle Enterprises has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5041132. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Enterprises	$27.00		Enterprises

Order

[The tenant/s] must carry out the following work to the premises, which must be completed by Tuesday 14 January 2025: a. Clean the windows and blinds in both bedrooms of all mould and grime to a reasonably clean and tidy standard. b. Clean the shower of all mould and grime to a reasonably clean and tidy standard. c. Clean the oven to a reasonably clean and tidy standard.
As an alternative to compliance with Order 2, the tenant must pay the landlord $500 immediately.
If the tenant fails to comply with either Order 2 or 3 above, then the landlord may undertake the work and charge the tenant the costs of this work up to $500. These costs may be treated as rent in arrears and enforced accordingly.
[The tenant/s] must pay The Property Boss Limited As Agent For Searle Enterprises $27.00 immediately, being reimbursement of the filing fee.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing represented by Ms Horne.
Mr Reweti did not attend and did not answer the calls made to his phone during the hearing. He had been notified of the hearing by email and text, accordingly pursuant to section 92 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) the hearing continued in his absence.
The landlord claims that Mr Reweti has failed to keep the property reasonably clean and tidy, in particular the windows, blinds, shower and oven. The landlord wants the problem fixed.
Under section 40(c) of the RTA, a tenant must keep the tenancy premises reasonably clean and reasonably tidy.
Where the Tribunal finds the tenant has failed to comply with any of these obligations, where appropriate it may make an order for the landlord to carry out the work. See section 78(1)(e) RTA.
If the work order is not being made by consent of both parties, the Tribunal must also make a monetary order as an alternative to compliance with the work order. See sections 78(2) and 78(2AA) RTA.
A work order may also authorise the landlord to undertake the work and charge the tenant the costs of doing the work, if the tenant should fail to comply with the work order and alternative monetary order. A monetary limit must be imposed by the Tribunal on the amount of costs that can be charged. These costs can be treated as rent in arrears and enforced accordingly. See sections 78(2AAB) and 78(2AAC)(a) RTA.
The landlord has provided photos that establish that Mr Reweti is breaching section 40(c) of the RTA. In particular he is allowing significant mould to grow on the shower, windows, blinds and curtains, and the oven is very dirty. He was issued a notice to remedy the areas on 2 October but has failed to comply with it.
The landlord’s oral and pictorial evidence is that the situation is getting worse as the mould is being left unattended.
Having considered the evidence, I find it appropriate to make a work order. Mr Reweti therefore has a week to clean the areas noted in the landlord’s notice of 2 October. If he fails to do so, the landlord may bring in their own cleaners to rectify the areas and pass the cost on to Mr Reweti. The landlord is to assess Mr Reweti’s compliance with this order at a notified inspection after 14 January.
To be clear to both parties, the assessment of what is reasonably clean and tidy is an objective one. The areas are not required to be perfectly clean but do need to be wiped of mould and debris.
Because The Property Boss Limited As Agent For Searle Enterprises has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5041132 — Mould & damp at Unit/Flat D3, 193 Riccarton Road, Riccarton, Christchurch

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5041132 — Mould & damp at Unit/Flat D3, 193 Riccarton Road, Riccarton, Christchurch

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions