What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5080428?

The tribunal order states: Darin Charles Rainbird must pay VSC Holdings Limited T/A Ready Property

How much money was awarded in case 5080428?

Individual award amounts are in the official MoJ PDF. Claim amounts appear on this page when claims and net totals reconcile.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5080428?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5080428?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11319436-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5080428?

The tribunal order states: Darin Charles Rainbird must pay VSC Holdings Limited T/A Ready Property

How much money was awarded in case 5080428?

Individual award amounts are in the official MoJ PDF. Claim amounts appear on this page when claims and net totals reconcile.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5080428?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5080428?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11319436-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

88 Creyke Road, Ilam, Christchurch 8041 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5080428 — Rent arrears

Order

Darin Charles Rainbird must pay VSC Holdings Limited T/A Ready Property Managers As Agent For Myungho Bae $27,615.46 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

Ms Chapman attended the hearing on behalf of the landlord.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Background
The tenancy began on 5 January 2024 and was for a fixed term to end on 10 January 2025.
The tenant did not occupy the property himself but used it to accommodate staff.
The tenant advised the landlord that he did not wish to renew the tenancy beyond the expiry date and the landlord contracted new tenants in September 2024, to commence a tenancy from 17 January 2025.
In October 2024, the tenant advised that he was unable to continue the tenancy and suggested that the bond would cover rent until new tenants were found for the property.
The landlord advised that they had already contracted new tenants to take possession at the end of the current fixed term but would attempt to find tenants to take the property on a short-term basis in the meantime.
The tenant was made aware that if this was not possible, he would be liable for rent to the end of the term of the tenancy.
The property is unfurnished and is purpose-built accommodation intended for students. Despite advertising on various websites, temporary tenants were not able to be secured.
The landlord is seeking rent arrears to the end of the fixed term.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 10 January 2025. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy being $21,857.14.

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 under section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act).
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
The property contains 10 bedrooms, four bathrooms and two kitchens as well as living and hallway spaces and a laundry room.
The landlord had spoken to the occupants about keeping the property clean during the tenancy, but little had been done to improve the situation.
A 14-day notice had been served in relation to venting the property to avoid a build up of mould, but again, little, if anything, had been done.
The landlord provided photographs to show that the property had not been left in a reasonably clean and tidy state. It is clear that limited effort had been made to clean the property and it was in an unacceptable state.
A cleaning invoice was provided in the amount of $5,106.00.
Although this invoice is certainly on the higher side, the property is much larger than usual and was left in a very dirty state.
Evidence provided showed that the kitchen (including the oven), windows and walls were very dirty and would have taken considerable time and effort to clean to an appropriate standard. The property was left with large possessions in place so even the most basic cleaning had not been done.
Photographs of the four bathrooms suggest that many hours cleaning would have been needed to get these rooms to a reasonable state.
Mould had been allowed to form on the walls during the tenancy (even in bedrooms and living areas) and considerable effort was needed to remove this.
The landlord also purchased additional products to clean troublesome areas and to remove an ant infestation ($44.94).
The occupants left unwanted furniture on the street and in and around the property at the end of the tenancy. Most had been left outside and none of the items left at the property had any value.
The landlord had to hire a skip to have the material removed ($499.00). Some rubbish had to be dumped separately as it was unable to be placed in the skip ($40.58).
Considerable labour was involved in clearing out the possessions.
The tenant did not return the keys and all exterior doors had to have locks replaced and new keys made ($837.85).
The following chattels were missing at the end of the tenancy: a. Two large full tubs of paint (colour matched to the walls) for touch ups during the tenancy as required (cost price $208.25). b. Three television remote controls (replacement $86.85).
The occupants had asked the power company to cut off the power to the property unnecessarily and this had to be reinstated at a cost of $25.00.
The landlord had also claimed for a replacement microwave oven, but no evidence was provided to show that a microwave was at the property at the commencement of the tenancy and none of the ingoing inspection photos showed a microwave. This claim was withdrawn during the hearing.
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 under sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B of the Act.
The following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. Damage to three freestanding wardrobes requiring replacement ($809.99 including assembly). b. Damage to curtains, all of which were under one year old at the beginning of the tenancy and many of which were new ($886.00). c. Damage to walls in some areas of the property requiring plastering and painting at an estimated cost of $3,438.50.
Although the painting has yet to be completed, photos confirm that damage throughout the property requires repair.
The landlord gave evidence that more than one painting quotation had been obtained and they are claiming the lower of these.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved.
I have not depreciated any items above as the wardrobes were all less than two years old and the property had been repainted almost entirely just before the tenancy commenced.
The curtains were either new at the beginning of the tenancy or less than one year old and they have been replaced with very cost-effective readymade options. Filing fee
As VSC Holdings Limited T/A Ready Property Managers As Agent For Myungho Bae has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5080428 — Rent arrears at 88 Creyke Road, Ilam, Christchurch 8041

Tenancy Tribunal case 5080428 — Rent arrears at 88 Creyke Road, Ilam, Christchurch 8041

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?

Property management

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?

Property management