What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5066248 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 5066248?

Cleaning: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $658.57 awarded to landlord; Oven Glass And Windows: $735.60 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5066248?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5066248?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11524490-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5066248 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 5066248?

Cleaning: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $658.57 awarded to landlord; Oven Glass And Windows: $735.60 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5066248?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5066248?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11524490-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5066248 — Property damage

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5066248 — net $581.17 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$658.57	Rent arrears
Cleaning	$500.00	Cleaning
Repairs: Oven glass and windows	$735.60	Repairs: Oven glass and windows
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$581.17
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$581.17

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name and identifying details.
Rangiunuuna Tipa must pay [The landlord/s] $581.17 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,340.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the video hearing.
The tenant did not attend the hearing by Teams video link nor answer the phone calls made to them. 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.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 23 September 2024. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy was $658.57.

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

Landlords are required to provide the premises to the tenant at the start of the tenancy in a reasonable state of cleanliness (see s 45(1)(a) RTA). Tenants must keep the premises reasonably clean and tidy during the tenancy, and they must return them in a reasonably clean and tidy state and remove their rubbish at the end of the tenancy (ss 40(1)(c) and (e)(iii) RTA).
In Ace Property Management v Owens (DC Wellington, CIV-2008-085-14441, 17 December 2008) the District Court said: A tenant’s obligation pursuant to the Act to leave a property in a “reasonably clean and reasonably tidy condition” does not mean that it will necessarily be up to a standard that a landlord may consider for a new tenant. It is a mistake for landlords to confuse those two matters.
The RTA does not require the premises to be provided or returned in a spotless or an immaculate condition. The standard is based on what an average bystander would consider reasonable; not on the subjective opinions of the landlord and tenant. There is no scientific way to determine what is reasonably clean and tidy, and the Tribunal must evaluate the evidence available, and in particular inspection reports and photographs.
The standard will vary according to the age and condition of the premises: the better the premises, the higher the standard. Surfaces that are new and in a good condition will be easier to clean than older and worn surfaces, particularly painted surfaces. Generally, tenants are not required to return premises any cleaner than they were at the start of the tenancy (Westwood v Western, DC Otahuhu, TT 2539/93 and 2540/93, 4 November 1994).
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy. The landlord explained that the premises had been cleaned to a standard where they could be relet. That is not the standard required of a tenant. A tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, which is generally accepted by the Tribunal to be a lower standard than required at the start of a tenancy. Having reviewed the photos, I consider a charge of $500.00 to be reasonable.

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.
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: the oven glass window and two other windows were broken. An invoice for $735.60 was provided. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved.
As [The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must order the tenant to reimburse the filing fee.
The landlord has applied for name suppression. The landlord has been wholly successful and suppression of the landlord name and details is ordered.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5066248 — net $581.17 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$658.57	Rent arrears
Cleaning	$500.00	Cleaning
Repairs: Oven glass and windows	$735.60	Repairs: Oven glass and windows
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$581.17
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$581.17

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name and identifying details.
Rangiunuuna Tipa must pay [The landlord/s] $581.17 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,340.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the video hearing.
The tenant did not attend the hearing by Teams video link nor answer the phone calls made to them. 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.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 23 September 2024. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy was $658.57.

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

Landlords are required to provide the premises to the tenant at the start of the tenancy in a reasonable state of cleanliness (see s 45(1)(a) RTA). Tenants must keep the premises reasonably clean and tidy during the tenancy, and they must return them in a reasonably clean and tidy state and remove their rubbish at the end of the tenancy (ss 40(1)(c) and (e)(iii) RTA).
In Ace Property Management v Owens (DC Wellington, CIV-2008-085-14441, 17 December 2008) the District Court said: A tenant’s obligation pursuant to the Act to leave a property in a “reasonably clean and reasonably tidy condition” does not mean that it will necessarily be up to a standard that a landlord may consider for a new tenant. It is a mistake for landlords to confuse those two matters.
The RTA does not require the premises to be provided or returned in a spotless or an immaculate condition. The standard is based on what an average bystander would consider reasonable; not on the subjective opinions of the landlord and tenant. There is no scientific way to determine what is reasonably clean and tidy, and the Tribunal must evaluate the evidence available, and in particular inspection reports and photographs.
The standard will vary according to the age and condition of the premises: the better the premises, the higher the standard. Surfaces that are new and in a good condition will be easier to clean than older and worn surfaces, particularly painted surfaces. Generally, tenants are not required to return premises any cleaner than they were at the start of the tenancy (Westwood v Western, DC Otahuhu, TT 2539/93 and 2540/93, 4 November 1994).
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy. The landlord explained that the premises had been cleaned to a standard where they could be relet. That is not the standard required of a tenant. A tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, which is generally accepted by the Tribunal to be a lower standard than required at the start of a tenancy. Having reviewed the photos, I consider a charge of $500.00 to be reasonable.

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.
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: the oven glass window and two other windows were broken. An invoice for $735.60 was provided. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved.
As [The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must order the tenant to reimburse the filing fee.
The landlord has applied for name suppression. The landlord has been wholly successful and suppression of the landlord name and details is ordered.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5066248 — Property damage

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5066248 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

How much is owed for rent?

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