What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5062392 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s]’s name and identifying details must not be published.

How much money was awarded in case 5062392?

Cleaning: $276.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lightbulbs: $218.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $414.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $770.70 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $419.75 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $2,485.65 awarded to landlord; Weeding: $100.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5062392?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage, Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5062392?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11995129-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5062392 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s]’s name and identifying details must not be published.

How much money was awarded in case 5062392?

Cleaning: $276.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lightbulbs: $218.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $414.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $770.70 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $419.75 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $2,485.65 awarded to landlord; Weeding: $100.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5062392?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage, Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5062392?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11995129-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

[Street number] Mariri Road, Onehunga, Auckland 1061 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5062392 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5062392. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 18/12/24	$770.70	Rent arrears to 18/12/24
Water rates	$2,485.65	Water rates
Cleaning	$276.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$419.75	Rubbish removal
Light bulbs	$218.50	Light bulbs
Weeding	$100.00	Weeding
Repairing kitchen bench	$414.00	Repairing kitchen bench
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement

Order

[The tenant/s]’s name and identifying details must not be published.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,760.00 to Ray White Remuera Property Management Limited as agent for Julia Matthews immediately.
Alejandro Ariel Rocha and [The tenant/s] must immediately pay Ray White Remuera Property Management Limited as agent for Julia Matthews $1,951.60, calculated as shown in table below.
The tenant, [tenant’s name], is not liable for the $1,951.60 ordered against the other two tenants. DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears to 18/12/24$770.70 Water rates$2,485.65 Cleaning$276.00 Rubbish removal$419.75 Light bulbs$218.50 Weeding$100.00 Repairing kitchen bench$414.00 Filing fee reimbursement$27.00 Total award$4,711.60 Bond Centre to pay landlord$2,760.00 Total amount two tenants must pay the landlord$1,951.60

Reasons

Lin Gao and Jack Grace attended the hearing for Ray White.
[Tenant’s name] attended. A Spanish interpreter assisted the Tribunal with interpretation for the tenant. The other tenants did not attend. The hearing proceeded in their absence.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
Mr [tenant’s surname] (“the tenant”) asks to be found not liable for costs the other tenants incurred when he had moved out of the premises. Background
The tenancy began on 10 February 2023 and ended on 18 December 2024.
The other tenants, the Rochas, are a family of three consisting of a husband and wife and their daughter.
At the beginning of the tenancy the tenant, who is a young man in his 20s, was in a relationship with Ms Rocha, the daughter.
The pair had relationship problems and the tenant moved out in late October 2023. The tenant moved back into the premises seven months later on about 24 May 2024 only to move out about a month later, with the relationship ending permanently this time.
The tenant tried to remove himself from the tenancy agreement and get his bond back. That became complicated because, although the tenant had paid his share of water and rent, the tenants jointly were behind on water and rent. The tenant tried to organise the other tenants to pay the arrears and get his share of the bond, but the other tenants did not follow through.
In summary, the tenancy continued for about 20 months. However, the tenancy only lived there for about half of that time for nine months at the beginning of the tenancy and then for one month later in the tenancy, moving out about six weeks before the tenancy ended.
When the tenancy ended, the other tenants remained in debt to the landlord for rent and water and they did not leave the premises clean or remove all of their belongings.

How much do the tenants owe for rent and water rates?

The tenancy ended on 18 December 2024. The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amounts owing for rent and water at 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 tenants must remove their belongings, leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and remove all rubbish. 1 1 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), s 40(1)(e).
The tenants must also replace standard light bulbs.
The tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all their belongings rubbish.
The landlord had to replace ten light bulbs.
The amounts ordered for cleaning, rubbish removal, light bulb replacement, and weeding are proved.

Are the tenants responsible for the damage to the premises?

The landlord claims for the cost of repairing a kitchen bench that was probably damaged by having a hot pot or frying pan placed on it.
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 tenants 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. 2
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenants have not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord seeks the cost of repair totalling $828.00 based on a quote. The premises has been re-tenanted without the bench having been repaired. The benchtop is an old- fashioned vinyl-topped style benchtop that is perhaps 20 years old.
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 bench at the start of the tenancy and its likely useful lifespan.
Therefore, I order the tenants to pay 50 per cent of the cost of repair. Order for non-liability
The tenant has applied for an order for non-liability for the landlord’s claims.
The Tribunal has an important limited discretion to ensure fairness even over technical correctness. Section 85(2) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides: The Tribunal shall determine each dispute according to the general principles of the law relating to the matter and the substantial merits and justice of the case, but shall not be bound to give effect to strict legal rights or obligations or to legal forms or technicalities.
This is one of the limited number of cases where the proviso as to substantial merits and justice should be applied.
The tenant remained a tenant in name only. He did not contribute to any of the other tenants’ breaches. They were not his doing. He was only the boyfriend of the parent- tenant’s daughter and he removed himself from the tenancy aside from finalising the formalities of having the tenancy agreement varied. 2 RTA, ss 40(2)(a), 41, and 49B RTA.
The tenant did tried to vary the agreement but was thwarted by the complexity of the legal situation, the fact he had contributed to half the bond, and the uncooperativeness of the other tenants.
The substantial merits call for an order of non-liability of the amounts over the bond. The other tenants should pay that. I am not going to grant the tenant his share of the bond, however. The bond is there to protect the landlord. There is a strong resumption that the bond cannot be diminished except in the most pressing circumstances, and this is not one of those. Filing fee
The tenants must reimburse the landlord because the landlord has substantially succeeded in its claim and the tenants actions necessitated these proceedings. Non-publication
The tenant seeks an order for non-publication of his name and identifying details.
The Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
The tenant has substantially succeeded in the proceedings. I do not consider that publication is in the public interest or justified by the tenant’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
It follows, the Tribunal orders non-publication of the tenant’s name and identifying details.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5062392. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 18/12/24	$770.70	Rent arrears to 18/12/24
Water rates	$2,485.65	Water rates
Cleaning	$276.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$419.75	Rubbish removal
Light bulbs	$218.50	Light bulbs
Weeding	$100.00	Weeding
Repairing kitchen bench	$414.00	Repairing kitchen bench
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement

Order

[The tenant/s]’s name and identifying details must not be published.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,760.00 to Ray White Remuera Property Management Limited as agent for Julia Matthews immediately.
Alejandro Ariel Rocha and [The tenant/s] must immediately pay Ray White Remuera Property Management Limited as agent for Julia Matthews $1,951.60, calculated as shown in table below.
The tenant, [tenant’s name], is not liable for the $1,951.60 ordered against the other two tenants. DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears to 18/12/24$770.70 Water rates$2,485.65 Cleaning$276.00 Rubbish removal$419.75 Light bulbs$218.50 Weeding$100.00 Repairing kitchen bench$414.00 Filing fee reimbursement$27.00 Total award$4,711.60 Bond Centre to pay landlord$2,760.00 Total amount two tenants must pay the landlord$1,951.60

Reasons

Lin Gao and Jack Grace attended the hearing for Ray White.
[Tenant’s name] attended. A Spanish interpreter assisted the Tribunal with interpretation for the tenant. The other tenants did not attend. The hearing proceeded in their absence.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
Mr [tenant’s surname] (“the tenant”) asks to be found not liable for costs the other tenants incurred when he had moved out of the premises. Background
The tenancy began on 10 February 2023 and ended on 18 December 2024.
The other tenants, the Rochas, are a family of three consisting of a husband and wife and their daughter.
At the beginning of the tenancy the tenant, who is a young man in his 20s, was in a relationship with Ms Rocha, the daughter.
The pair had relationship problems and the tenant moved out in late October 2023. The tenant moved back into the premises seven months later on about 24 May 2024 only to move out about a month later, with the relationship ending permanently this time.
The tenant tried to remove himself from the tenancy agreement and get his bond back. That became complicated because, although the tenant had paid his share of water and rent, the tenants jointly were behind on water and rent. The tenant tried to organise the other tenants to pay the arrears and get his share of the bond, but the other tenants did not follow through.
In summary, the tenancy continued for about 20 months. However, the tenancy only lived there for about half of that time for nine months at the beginning of the tenancy and then for one month later in the tenancy, moving out about six weeks before the tenancy ended.
When the tenancy ended, the other tenants remained in debt to the landlord for rent and water and they did not leave the premises clean or remove all of their belongings.

How much do the tenants owe for rent and water rates?

The tenancy ended on 18 December 2024. The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amounts owing for rent and water at 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 tenants must remove their belongings, leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and remove all rubbish. 1 1 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), s 40(1)(e).
The tenants must also replace standard light bulbs.
The tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all their belongings rubbish.
The landlord had to replace ten light bulbs.
The amounts ordered for cleaning, rubbish removal, light bulb replacement, and weeding are proved.

Are the tenants responsible for the damage to the premises?

The landlord claims for the cost of repairing a kitchen bench that was probably damaged by having a hot pot or frying pan placed on it.
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 tenants 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. 2
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenants have not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord seeks the cost of repair totalling $828.00 based on a quote. The premises has been re-tenanted without the bench having been repaired. The benchtop is an old- fashioned vinyl-topped style benchtop that is perhaps 20 years old.
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 bench at the start of the tenancy and its likely useful lifespan.
Therefore, I order the tenants to pay 50 per cent of the cost of repair. Order for non-liability
The tenant has applied for an order for non-liability for the landlord’s claims.
The Tribunal has an important limited discretion to ensure fairness even over technical correctness. Section 85(2) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides: The Tribunal shall determine each dispute according to the general principles of the law relating to the matter and the substantial merits and justice of the case, but shall not be bound to give effect to strict legal rights or obligations or to legal forms or technicalities.
This is one of the limited number of cases where the proviso as to substantial merits and justice should be applied.
The tenant remained a tenant in name only. He did not contribute to any of the other tenants’ breaches. They were not his doing. He was only the boyfriend of the parent- tenant’s daughter and he removed himself from the tenancy aside from finalising the formalities of having the tenancy agreement varied. 2 RTA, ss 40(2)(a), 41, and 49B RTA.
The tenant did tried to vary the agreement but was thwarted by the complexity of the legal situation, the fact he had contributed to half the bond, and the uncooperativeness of the other tenants.
The substantial merits call for an order of non-liability of the amounts over the bond. The other tenants should pay that. I am not going to grant the tenant his share of the bond, however. The bond is there to protect the landlord. There is a strong resumption that the bond cannot be diminished except in the most pressing circumstances, and this is not one of those. Filing fee
The tenants must reimburse the landlord because the landlord has substantially succeeded in its claim and the tenants actions necessitated these proceedings. Non-publication
The tenant seeks an order for non-publication of his name and identifying details.
The Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
The tenant has substantially succeeded in the proceedings. I do not consider that publication is in the public interest or justified by the tenant’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
It follows, the Tribunal orders non-publication of the tenant’s name and identifying details.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5062392 — Rent arrears at [Street number] Mariri Road, Onehunga, Auckland 1061

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5062392 — Rent arrears at [Street number] Mariri Road, Onehunga, Auckland 1061

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much do the tenants owe for rent and water rates?

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Are the tenants responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much do the tenants owe for rent and water rates?

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Are the tenants responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions