What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5045391 about?

The tribunal order states: By agreement, suppression of both the Tenant and Landlord names and

How much money was awarded in case 5045391?

Cleaning: $150.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Vanity: $700.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $120.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5045391?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5045391?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11215915-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5045391 about?

The tribunal order states: By agreement, suppression of both the Tenant and Landlord names and

How much money was awarded in case 5045391?

Cleaning: $150.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Vanity: $700.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $120.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5045391?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5045391?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11215915-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5045391 — Cleanliness

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5045391 — net $970.50 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Carpet cleaning	$150.00	Carpet cleaning
Water rates	$120.50	Water rates
Replace furnishings: Vanity	$700.00	Replace furnishings: Vanity
Net award	$970.50
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$970.50

By agreement, suppression of both the Tenant and Landlord names and identifying details.

[The tenant/s] to pay [The landlord/s] $970.50 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,600.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as shown in table below:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

The tenant has applied for a refund of their bond.

The landlord has applied for water rates, compensation and partial refund of the bond.

The tenant does not dispute the claims for water rates and carpet cleaning. The amounts ordered are proven by the invoices provided.

The claims for general cleaning and damage to the vanity are disputed.

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.

After viewing the outgoing inspection photographs, I am not persuaded any additional cleaning was required to bring the premises up to a reasonable standard.

This part of the claim is not proven and must be dismissed.

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 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.

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: water damage to the drawers and side panels of bathroom vanity.

The tenant says this is fair wear and tear and the bathroom was not used that much as her child is in daycare most days and everyone is out to work. The tenant says the sink was already cracked at the start of the tenancy but was unable to provide any supporting evidence.

I find that the damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. I accept the evidence of the landlord’s plumber that the cabinetry is swollen, and the laminated covering is split because water was likely overflowing around the cabinetry and not wiped down.

Weighing the substantive merits and justice, I award $700.00 as fair, reasonable and proportionate compensation. I accept the landlord’s evidence that their insurance does not cover the damage to the drawers and side panels of the bathroom vanity.

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 vanity at the start of the tenancy and likely useful lifespan.

Both parties agree to name suppression for each other.

As both parties have been partly successful, I decline to make any award for the respective filing fees.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5045391 — net $970.50 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Carpet cleaning	$150.00	Carpet cleaning
Water rates	$120.50	Water rates
Replace furnishings: Vanity	$700.00	Replace furnishings: Vanity
Net award	$970.50
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$970.50

Order

By agreement, suppression of both the Tenant and Landlord names and identifying details.
[The tenant/s] to pay [The landlord/s] $970.50 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,600.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as shown in table below:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenant has applied for a refund of their bond.
The landlord has applied for water rates, compensation and partial refund of the bond.
The tenant does not dispute the claims for water rates and carpet cleaning. The amounts ordered are proven by the invoices provided.
The claims for general cleaning and damage to the vanity are disputed.

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.
After viewing the outgoing inspection photographs, I am not persuaded any additional cleaning was required to bring the premises up to a reasonable standard.
This part of the claim is not proven and must be dismissed.

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 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.
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: water damage to the drawers and side panels of bathroom vanity.
The tenant says this is fair wear and tear and the bathroom was not used that much as her child is in daycare most days and everyone is out to work. The tenant says the sink was already cracked at the start of the tenancy but was unable to provide any supporting evidence.
I find that the damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. I accept the evidence of the landlord’s plumber that the cabinetry is swollen, and the laminated covering is split because water was likely overflowing around the cabinetry and not wiped down.
Weighing the substantive merits and justice, I award $700.00 as fair, reasonable and proportionate compensation. I accept the landlord’s evidence that their insurance does not cover the damage to the drawers and side panels of the bathroom vanity.
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 vanity at the start of the tenancy and likely useful lifespan.
Both parties agree to name suppression for each other.
As both parties have been partly successful, I decline to make any award for the respective filing fees.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5045391 — Cleanliness

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5045391 — Cleanliness

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