How much money was awarded in case 5077711?

Cleaning: $862.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,800.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $5,709.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $1,028.10 awarded to landlord; Bunnings Door Handles Etc: $501.00 awarded to landlord; Painting: $400.25 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5077711?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Exemplary damages, Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5077711?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11862529-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5077711?

Cleaning: $862.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,800.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $5,709.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $1,028.10 awarded to landlord; Bunnings Door Handles Etc: $501.00 awarded to landlord; Painting: $400.25 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5077711?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Exemplary damages, Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5077711?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11862529-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5077711 — Cleanliness

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5077711 about?

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

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5077711 — net $9,358.84 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Meth testing/Cleaning: Meth Solutions	$1,028.10	Meth testing/Cleaning: Meth Solutions
Meth testing/Cleaning: Kiwisafeas Decontamination	$5,709.00	Meth testing/Cleaning: Kiwisafeas Decontamination
Carpet Cleaning: Meth Detect MD1728	$862.50	Carpet Cleaning: Meth Detect MD1728
Repairs: Painting	$400.25	Repairs: Painting
Repairs: Bunnings door handles etc	$501.00	Repairs: Bunnings door handles etc
Exemplary damages	$1,800.00	Exemplary damages
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$9,358.84
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$9,358.84

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.

Justin Shapleski must pay [The landlord/s] $9,358.84 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $969.01 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing on 24 February 2025 and again on 1 May 2025 via teleconference. The tenant did not attend either of the hearings.

The landlord applied for methamphetamine detection and decontamination costs, compensation for carpets, kitchen appliances, furniture, curtains, painting, hardware, mileage and parking.

The hearing was adjourned for the landlord to provide evidence of the premises having become contaminated with methamphetamine during the between 23 June 2022 and 24 October 2024. Methamphetamine damage

Since the adjournment, the landlord was able to provide a summary of NZ Detector Dog visits in relation to the tenancy address.

There were no drugs being detected by the detector dogs during their visits on 11 February 2021, 10 March 2021, 4 February 2022 and 25 July 2022. Positive indication for drugs at the premises were found by 3 different detector dogs on 1 March 2023, 7 September 2023, and 1 October 2024.

I am satisfied that methamphetamine damage was caused during the tenant’s tenancy.

This is intentional damage and is using the premises for an unlawful purpose.

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) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).

A tenant must not use the premises or permit the premises to be used for an unlawful purpose. See section 40(2)(b) RTA.

Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $1,800.00. See section 40(3A)(c) and Schedule 1A RTA.

I am satisfied that the landlord has proven that the tenant has consumed methamphetamine at the premises. Consuming methamphetamine is unlawful under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975. The tenant has committed an unlawful act.

Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. See section 109(3) RTA.

In this case, the tenant’s use of the methamphetamine at the premises had rendered the need to replace all chattels within the premises. There is public interest in this act being denounced. I award the maximum exemplary damages of $1,800.00 to the landlord.

For the methamphetamine detection and decontamination, I order the tenant to pay the landlord $1,028.10 for Meth Solutions invoice, $5,709.00 for Kiwisafeas decontamination and $862.50 for post-decontamination testing.

I also order the tenant to pay for the painting of $400.25 and $501.00 for handles, plumbing, and door parts from Bunnings which were necessary due to the methamphetamine damage. Chattel replacements

For chattel replacement claims, the Tribunal must take 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, the Tribunal must take into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.

At the hearing, it was established that the carpets, oven, cooktop, washer, fridge, bed base, foam mattress, couch, chairs and curtains all had outlived their useful lifespan by the time that they were damaged.

For accounting purposes, they had been fully depreciated.

The landlord argued that despite the chattels still had residual value of approximately $50 to $150 for the chairs and curtains.

However, I declined to award approximate the residual values of the chattels as I have acknowledged them already in the exemplary damage award for the unlawful act.

I also decline to award mileage and parking costs as they can be deducted as business expense for the landlord for the tenancy. Filing fee reimbursement

Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim, I order the tenant to reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5077711 — net $9,358.84 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Meth testing/Cleaning: Meth Solutions	$1,028.10	Meth testing/Cleaning: Meth Solutions
Meth testing/Cleaning: Kiwisafeas Decontamination	$5,709.00	Meth testing/Cleaning: Kiwisafeas Decontamination
Carpet Cleaning: Meth Detect MD1728	$862.50	Carpet Cleaning: Meth Detect MD1728
Repairs: Painting	$400.25	Repairs: Painting
Repairs: Bunnings door handles etc	$501.00	Repairs: Bunnings door handles etc
Exemplary damages	$1,800.00	Exemplary damages
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$9,358.84
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$9,358.84

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
Justin Shapleski must pay [The landlord/s] $9,358.84 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $969.01 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing on 24 February 2025 and again on 1 May 2025 via teleconference. The tenant did not attend either of the hearings.
The landlord applied for methamphetamine detection and decontamination costs, compensation for carpets, kitchen appliances, furniture, curtains, painting, hardware, mileage and parking.
The hearing was adjourned for the landlord to provide evidence of the premises having become contaminated with methamphetamine during the between 23 June 2022 and 24 October 2024. Methamphetamine damage
Since the adjournment, the landlord was able to provide a summary of NZ Detector Dog visits in relation to the tenancy address.
There were no drugs being detected by the detector dogs during their visits on 11 February 2021, 10 March 2021, 4 February 2022 and 25 July 2022. Positive indication for drugs at the premises were found by 3 different detector dogs on 1 March 2023, 7 September 2023, and 1 October 2024.
I am satisfied that methamphetamine damage was caused during the tenant’s tenancy.
This is intentional damage and is using the premises for an unlawful purpose.
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) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
A tenant must not use the premises or permit the premises to be used for an unlawful purpose. See section 40(2)(b) RTA.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $1,800.00. See section 40(3A)(c) and Schedule 1A RTA.
I am satisfied that the landlord has proven that the tenant has consumed methamphetamine at the premises. Consuming methamphetamine is unlawful under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975. The tenant has committed an unlawful act.
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. See section 109(3) RTA.
In this case, the tenant’s use of the methamphetamine at the premises had rendered the need to replace all chattels within the premises. There is public interest in this act being denounced. I award the maximum exemplary damages of $1,800.00 to the landlord.
For the methamphetamine detection and decontamination, I order the tenant to pay the landlord $1,028.10 for Meth Solutions invoice, $5,709.00 for Kiwisafeas decontamination and $862.50 for post-decontamination testing.
I also order the tenant to pay for the painting of $400.25 and $501.00 for handles, plumbing, and door parts from Bunnings which were necessary due to the methamphetamine damage. Chattel replacements
For chattel replacement claims, the Tribunal must take 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, the Tribunal must take into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.
At the hearing, it was established that the carpets, oven, cooktop, washer, fridge, bed base, foam mattress, couch, chairs and curtains all had outlived their useful lifespan by the time that they were damaged.
For accounting purposes, they had been fully depreciated.
The landlord argued that despite the chattels still had residual value of approximately $50 to $150 for the chairs and curtains.
However, I declined to award approximate the residual values of the chattels as I have acknowledged them already in the exemplary damage award for the unlawful act.
I also decline to award mileage and parking costs as they can be deducted as business expense for the landlord for the tenancy. Filing fee reimbursement
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim, I order the tenant to reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5077711 — Cleanliness

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5077711 — Cleanliness

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions