What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5075049 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 5075049?

Cleaning: $109.25 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $800.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 4923474 D…: $4,320.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $746.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $563.50 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $1,147.47 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5075049?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5075049?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11401103-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5075049 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 5075049?

Cleaning: $109.25 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $800.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 4923474 D…: $4,320.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $746.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $563.50 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $1,147.47 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5075049?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5075049?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11401103-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

42 Barnhill Crescent, Pahurehure, Papakura 2113 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5075049 — Cleanliness

Tenantcheck Insights

42 Barnhill Crescent, Pahurehure, Papakura 2113 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5075049 — Cleanliness | TenantCheck

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5075049 — net $7,713.66 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Previous order application 4923474 dated 19/08/2024	$4,320.44	Previous order application 4923474 dated 19/08/2024
Water rates	$1,147.47	Water rates
Lock/key replacement	$746.00	Lock/key replacement
Rubbish removal	$563.50	Rubbish removal
Oven/stove cleaning	$109.25	Oven/stove cleaning
Cleaning	$800.00	Cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$7,713.66
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$7,713.66

Claims and awards for application 5075049 — net $7,713.66 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Previous order application 4923474 dated 19/08/2024

Amount: $4,320.44
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Previous order application 4923474 dated 19/08/2024

Water rates

Amount: $1,147.47
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Water rates

Lock/key replacement

Amount: $746.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lock/key replacement

Rubbish removal

Amount: $563.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal

Oven/stove cleaning

Amount: $109.25
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Oven/stove cleaning

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Filing Fee Property damage Rubbish Removal Water Rates

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord name and identifying details.
Arthur Mahu, Frances Mahu and Michael Mahu must pay [The landlord/s] $1,893.47 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 19/8/2024 under application 4923474.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Arthur Mahu was the only tenant that could be contacted.
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 did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The tenancy ran for 3 years and 8 months, the interior of the premises are dated and there were issues with water leaks during the tenancy. Taking all of these things into account and noting that the standard that a tenant must leave a property is reasonable and not spotless, the amount ordered is considered reasonable. In particular tenants are not required to clean all windows inside and out as noted on the cleaner’s invoice; that is generally a matter for landlord’s as part of the usual between tenancy maintenance obligation so the property can be relet.
However, the photos confirm this property was far from clean and tidy which is reflected in the high albeit reduced amount awarded.
The tenant did not return the keys. The tenancy agreement confirms that 14 keys were provided, including for the sliding doors and security screen doors.
The amounts ordered are proved.

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.
The landlord had claimed for repairs to an internal door, but did not provide an invoice to establish the costs and said this claim could be withdrawn.
On 19/8/2024 the Tribunal made an order relating to this tenancy, for rent arrears, filing fee reimbursement and refund of the bond.
The landlord confirmed the previous order has not been enforced. It is therefore incorporated into this order for enforcement purposes.
The landlord requested name suppression. As the application is largely successful this request is approved.
The public interest, given the large debt outstanding, requires that the tenants’ names are published.

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5075049 — net $7,713.66 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Previous order application 4923474 dated 19/08/2024	$4,320.44	Previous order application 4923474 dated 19/08/2024
Water rates	$1,147.47	Water rates
Lock/key replacement	$746.00	Lock/key replacement
Rubbish removal	$563.50	Rubbish removal
Oven/stove cleaning	$109.25	Oven/stove cleaning
Cleaning	$800.00	Cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$7,713.66
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$7,713.66

Claims and awards for application 5075049 — net $7,713.66 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Previous order application 4923474 dated 19/08/2024

Amount: $4,320.44
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Previous order application 4923474 dated 19/08/2024

Water rates

Amount: $1,147.47
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Water rates

Lock/key replacement

Amount: $746.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lock/key replacement

Rubbish removal

Amount: $563.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal

Oven/stove cleaning

Amount: $109.25
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Oven/stove cleaning

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Filing Fee Property damage Rubbish Removal Water Rates

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord name and identifying details.
Arthur Mahu, Frances Mahu and Michael Mahu must pay [The landlord/s] $1,893.47 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 19/8/2024 under application 4923474.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Arthur Mahu was the only tenant that could be contacted.
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 did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The tenancy ran for 3 years and 8 months, the interior of the premises are dated and there were issues with water leaks during the tenancy. Taking all of these things into account and noting that the standard that a tenant must leave a property is reasonable and not spotless, the amount ordered is considered reasonable. In particular tenants are not required to clean all windows inside and out as noted on the cleaner’s invoice; that is generally a matter for landlord’s as part of the usual between tenancy maintenance obligation so the property can be relet.
However, the photos confirm this property was far from clean and tidy which is reflected in the high albeit reduced amount awarded.
The tenant did not return the keys. The tenancy agreement confirms that 14 keys were provided, including for the sliding doors and security screen doors.
The amounts ordered are proved.

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.
The landlord had claimed for repairs to an internal door, but did not provide an invoice to establish the costs and said this claim could be withdrawn.
On 19/8/2024 the Tribunal made an order relating to this tenancy, for rent arrears, filing fee reimbursement and refund of the bond.
The landlord confirmed the previous order has not been enforced. It is therefore incorporated into this order for enforcement purposes.
The landlord requested name suppression. As the application is largely successful this request is approved.
The public interest, given the large debt outstanding, requires that the tenants’ names are published.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5075049 — Cleanliness at 42 Barnhill Crescent, Pahurehure, Papakura 2113

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5075049 — Cleanliness at 42 Barnhill Crescent, Pahurehure, Papakura 2113

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