What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5087709 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 5087709?

Cleaning: $575.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $690.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,006.02 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $575.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $345.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $517.15 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $807.14 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,538.44 awarded to landlord; Replace Toilet Cabinet: $690.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $575.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $65.86 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5087709?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5087709?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11649446-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5087709 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 5087709?

Cleaning: $575.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $690.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,006.02 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $575.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $345.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $517.15 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $807.14 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,538.44 awarded to landlord; Replace Toilet Cabinet: $690.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $575.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $65.86 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5087709?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5087709?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11649446-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5087709 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5087709 — net $5,411.61 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears from 12/11/2024 to 19/11/2024	$807.14	Rent arrears from 12/11/2024 to 19/11/2024
Previous order application 50004448 dated 11/11/2024 includes rent arrears and water rates to 11/11/2024	$2,538.44	Previous order application 50004448 dated 11/11/2024 includes rent arrears and water rates to 11/11/2024
Cleaning	$575.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$575.00	Rubbish removal
Replace missing and damaged curtains	$1,006.02	Replace missing and damaged curtains
Repair bedroom door	$575.00	Repair bedroom door
Repair door frame	$345.00	Repair door frame
Repair sliding door lock	$517.15	Repair sliding door lock
Replace toilet cabinet	$690.00	Replace toilet cabinet
Lawns and Garden work	$690.00	Lawns and Garden work
Water rates	$65.86	Water rates
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$5,411.61
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,411.61

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
June McFarland must pay [The landlord/s] $5,411.61 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 11 November 2024 under application 50004448.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,000.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.
The landlord’s claim for a replacement fridge is dismissed.

Reasons

This is a reserved decision. The hearing for this matter took place on 28 November 2024.
Representatives of the landlord’s agent attended the hearing on behalf of the landlord. The tenant did not attend the hearing. I am satisfied that the tenant was served notice of the hearing. The tenant has not communicated with the Tribunal as to why she would not attend the hearing. The hearing proceeded in the tenant’s absence.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, outgoings, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Relevant legal considerations:
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations. This means that it is for the party bringing the application to establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. The party bringing the application must establish that what they are claiming is more likely than not. This is referred to as the “burden of proof”. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
As noted by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: ... [L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.
I do not need to be completely certain, but I need to be more certain than uncertain. In deciding any particular claim, I must consider all the evidence presented (including oral evidence during the hearing). I must weigh this evidence to decide what is more likely.

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

The tenancy ended on 19 November 2024. The landlord provided rent records in the form of a rent ledger which prove the amount of rent owing at the end of the tenancy.
The decision of 11 November 2024 (5000448) orders the tenant to pay water arrears of $261.45. This was up to and including the invoice for 21 October 2024. Since then, there has been a further water invoice for the period up to 20 November 2024, which was provided to the Tribunal. I award the sum of $65.86 for that invoice.
These claims are proved.

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

Section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) provides that 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. Section 40(1)(ca) of the RTA provides the tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The landlord has provided photographs of the premises at the end of the tenancy which show that the tenant did not leave the premises (including the garden) reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The landlord has provided an invoice and photographs showing that this work has been completed and an invoice issued.
The amounts ordered for rubbish removal, cleaning and garden work are proved and are GST inclusive.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B of the RTA provides that 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.
Section 49B(3)(a) of the RTA provides that 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).
Section 49B(3)(b) of the RTA provides that 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). Section 49B(3A)(a) of the RTA provides that where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage.
Section 49B(1) of the RTA provides that 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.
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 landlord claims the following damage was caused during the tenancy: damage to curtains; curtains removed from the premises; bedroom door was broken, holes on the walls, damage to the door frame, the sliding door lock was broken, the toilet cabinet was broken and the fridge was missing.
The landlord has re-tenanted the premises and has not replaced the fridge. I have dismissed this claim because I am not satisfied that the landlord has suffered a loss from this breach.
The landlord has provided photographs of the premises from the start of the tenancy and at the end of the tenancy. These photographs prove that the damage was caused during the tenancy. I find that the damage is more than fair wear and tear. The tenant has not disproved liability for the damage or that the damage was not intentional.
The landlord has provided an invoice from Great Sharp Construction Limited to Focus Reserve Limited for a total of $5,807.50 (including GST). The landlord said the invoice has not been paid yet. The landlord said that they have a good working relationship with Great Sharp Construction Limited and it has been agreed with Great Sharp Construction Limited that payment could be made after the Tribunal hearing. The landlord provided photographs showing that the work had been completed. I am satisfied that the work has been completed and that the landlord is liable for this charge.
The landlord has claimed $1,380.00 to replace curtains (including GST). The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been, if the tenant had not breached their obligations to the landlord. This means the landlord cannot receive compensation that would put them into a better position. In calculating depreciation, I must take into account the age and general condition of the item when the damage occurred, and their otherwise useful life span.
The Inland Revenue in its General Depreciation Rates Guidance, IR265, October 2023 provides that curtains have an estimated useful life of 8 years.
Following the hearing the landlord was asked for the age of the curtains. The landlord advised that the curtains were “new”. Presumably that means new at the start of the tenancy. As a date for the age of the curtains has not been provided, it is necessary for me to review the photographic evidence and assign an age to the curtains. I have done so and give them an age of 3 years.
After depreciation, I award $1,006.02 (inclusive of GST) for the curtains.
The other amounts claimed have been ordered. These amounts are also inclusive of GST. Failure to include full insurance information in tenancy agreement:
Since 2019, the RTA has limited tenants’ liability for careless damage. As explained above, if a tenant damages the premises as a result of careless behaviour, they will be liable for the cost of the damage up to a maximum of four weeks’ rent or the landlord’s insurance excess, whichever is lower. Tenants on income-related rents will be liable for up to four weeks’ market rent or the landlord’s insurance excess, whichever is lower.
At the same time, the RTA was amended to provide that landlords must provide insurance information in any new tenancy agreement. This information must include whether the premises are insured and, if so, what the excess amount is. The statement in the tenancy agreement must also inform the tenant that a copy of their insurance policy is available on request. 1
The landlord has provided a tenancy agreement signed by the parties. The tenancy agreement states that the premises is insured but it does not state the excess payable. At the hearing, the landlord advised that the insurance is dwelling insurance only and the excess is $500.00. In this case, the tenant has not disproved that the damage was intentional. Therefore, the issue of insurance is not relevant.
Having said that, failing to include the insurance excess in the tenancy agreement is an unlawful act under the RTA, making the landlord liable for exemplary damages of up to $750.00. 2 In this case, the tenant has not made a claim and I make no order for exemplary damages. I trust the landlord will take greater care when preparing the tenancy agreement in future. Other matters:
[The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim. For this reason, I have reimbursed the filing fee and ordered suppression of the landlord’s name 1 See section 13A(2) of the RTA. 2 See section 13A(1F)(b), 109 and Schedule 1A of the RTA. and identifying details.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5087709 — net $5,411.61 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears from 12/11/2024 to 19/11/2024	$807.14	Rent arrears from 12/11/2024 to 19/11/2024
Previous order application 50004448 dated 11/11/2024 includes rent arrears and water rates to 11/11/2024	$2,538.44	Previous order application 50004448 dated 11/11/2024 includes rent arrears and water rates to 11/11/2024
Cleaning	$575.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$575.00	Rubbish removal
Replace missing and damaged curtains	$1,006.02	Replace missing and damaged curtains
Repair bedroom door	$575.00	Repair bedroom door
Repair door frame	$345.00	Repair door frame
Repair sliding door lock	$517.15	Repair sliding door lock
Replace toilet cabinet	$690.00	Replace toilet cabinet
Lawns and Garden work	$690.00	Lawns and Garden work
Water rates	$65.86	Water rates
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$5,411.61
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,411.61

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
June McFarland must pay [The landlord/s] $5,411.61 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 11 November 2024 under application 50004448.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,000.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.
The landlord’s claim for a replacement fridge is dismissed.

Reasons

This is a reserved decision. The hearing for this matter took place on 28 November 2024.
Representatives of the landlord’s agent attended the hearing on behalf of the landlord. The tenant did not attend the hearing. I am satisfied that the tenant was served notice of the hearing. The tenant has not communicated with the Tribunal as to why she would not attend the hearing. The hearing proceeded in the tenant’s absence.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, outgoings, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Relevant legal considerations:
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations. This means that it is for the party bringing the application to establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. The party bringing the application must establish that what they are claiming is more likely than not. This is referred to as the “burden of proof”. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
As noted by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: ... [L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.
I do not need to be completely certain, but I need to be more certain than uncertain. In deciding any particular claim, I must consider all the evidence presented (including oral evidence during the hearing). I must weigh this evidence to decide what is more likely.

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

The tenancy ended on 19 November 2024. The landlord provided rent records in the form of a rent ledger which prove the amount of rent owing at the end of the tenancy.
The decision of 11 November 2024 (5000448) orders the tenant to pay water arrears of $261.45. This was up to and including the invoice for 21 October 2024. Since then, there has been a further water invoice for the period up to 20 November 2024, which was provided to the Tribunal. I award the sum of $65.86 for that invoice.
These claims are proved.

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

Section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) provides that 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. Section 40(1)(ca) of the RTA provides the tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The landlord has provided photographs of the premises at the end of the tenancy which show that the tenant did not leave the premises (including the garden) reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The landlord has provided an invoice and photographs showing that this work has been completed and an invoice issued.
The amounts ordered for rubbish removal, cleaning and garden work are proved and are GST inclusive.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B of the RTA provides that 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.
Section 49B(3)(a) of the RTA provides that 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).
Section 49B(3)(b) of the RTA provides that 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). Section 49B(3A)(a) of the RTA provides that where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage.
Section 49B(1) of the RTA provides that 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.
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 landlord claims the following damage was caused during the tenancy: damage to curtains; curtains removed from the premises; bedroom door was broken, holes on the walls, damage to the door frame, the sliding door lock was broken, the toilet cabinet was broken and the fridge was missing.
The landlord has re-tenanted the premises and has not replaced the fridge. I have dismissed this claim because I am not satisfied that the landlord has suffered a loss from this breach.
The landlord has provided photographs of the premises from the start of the tenancy and at the end of the tenancy. These photographs prove that the damage was caused during the tenancy. I find that the damage is more than fair wear and tear. The tenant has not disproved liability for the damage or that the damage was not intentional.
The landlord has provided an invoice from Great Sharp Construction Limited to Focus Reserve Limited for a total of $5,807.50 (including GST). The landlord said the invoice has not been paid yet. The landlord said that they have a good working relationship with Great Sharp Construction Limited and it has been agreed with Great Sharp Construction Limited that payment could be made after the Tribunal hearing. The landlord provided photographs showing that the work had been completed. I am satisfied that the work has been completed and that the landlord is liable for this charge.
The landlord has claimed $1,380.00 to replace curtains (including GST). The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been, if the tenant had not breached their obligations to the landlord. This means the landlord cannot receive compensation that would put them into a better position. In calculating depreciation, I must take into account the age and general condition of the item when the damage occurred, and their otherwise useful life span.
The Inland Revenue in its General Depreciation Rates Guidance, IR265, October 2023 provides that curtains have an estimated useful life of 8 years.
Following the hearing the landlord was asked for the age of the curtains. The landlord advised that the curtains were “new”. Presumably that means new at the start of the tenancy. As a date for the age of the curtains has not been provided, it is necessary for me to review the photographic evidence and assign an age to the curtains. I have done so and give them an age of 3 years.
After depreciation, I award $1,006.02 (inclusive of GST) for the curtains.
The other amounts claimed have been ordered. These amounts are also inclusive of GST. Failure to include full insurance information in tenancy agreement:
Since 2019, the RTA has limited tenants’ liability for careless damage. As explained above, if a tenant damages the premises as a result of careless behaviour, they will be liable for the cost of the damage up to a maximum of four weeks’ rent or the landlord’s insurance excess, whichever is lower. Tenants on income-related rents will be liable for up to four weeks’ market rent or the landlord’s insurance excess, whichever is lower.
At the same time, the RTA was amended to provide that landlords must provide insurance information in any new tenancy agreement. This information must include whether the premises are insured and, if so, what the excess amount is. The statement in the tenancy agreement must also inform the tenant that a copy of their insurance policy is available on request. 1
The landlord has provided a tenancy agreement signed by the parties. The tenancy agreement states that the premises is insured but it does not state the excess payable. At the hearing, the landlord advised that the insurance is dwelling insurance only and the excess is $500.00. In this case, the tenant has not disproved that the damage was intentional. Therefore, the issue of insurance is not relevant.
Having said that, failing to include the insurance excess in the tenancy agreement is an unlawful act under the RTA, making the landlord liable for exemplary damages of up to $750.00. 2 In this case, the tenant has not made a claim and I make no order for exemplary damages. I trust the landlord will take greater care when preparing the tenancy agreement in future. Other matters:
[The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim. For this reason, I have reimbursed the filing fee and ordered suppression of the landlord’s name 1 See section 13A(2) of the RTA. 2 See section 13A(1F)(b), 109 and Schedule 1A of the RTA. and identifying details.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5087709 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5087709 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

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 and water rates?

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