What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5092110?

The tribunal order states: Ladeana Gibbs and Ra Newman must pay Barfoot & Thompson Limited As

How much money was awarded in case 5092110?

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 5092110?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5092110?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11855946-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5092110?

The tribunal order states: Ladeana Gibbs and Ra Newman must pay Barfoot & Thompson Limited As

How much money was awarded in case 5092110?

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 5092110?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5092110?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11855946-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

14 Thomas Road, Flat Bush, Auckland 2019 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5092110 — Rent arrears

Order

Ladeana Gibbs and Ra Newman must pay Barfoot & Thompson Limited As Agent For Chan, Helen L K; Raisat, Imran S A $2,353.95 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing, conducted via teleconference. Two calls to the tenants went unanswered. I was satisfied adequate service had completed and I continued with the hearing after the second call also went unanswered.
The landlord has had recent text communication from the tenant’s number.
The landlord had applied for rent arrears, water rates, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
A prior order released the bond, given the rent arrears established. That order also detailed further claims by the landlord, received late, to be determined at this hearing.

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

The tenancy ended on 16 November 2024. The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amounts owing at the end of the tenancy are as ordered.

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 as there was a lingering dog odour that took extensive cleaning to remove. The walls also required cleaning due to pet staining. The landlord provided invoices for the cleaning and these are awarded in full.
The lawns were overgrown and a contractor invoice for mowing the lawns ($115.00) established the cost to remedy.
The heat pump remote were missing at the end of the tenancy and replaced at a cost of $39.98.
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.
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: a. Wardrobe door. A bedroom wardrobe door was badly scratched, more than likely by the dog. The landlord provided ingoing comparative photos to confirm the damage occurred during the tenancy. The invoice for repainting the door ($416.30) was produced to establish the loss. This is awarded in full. b. Electrical fittings. Electrical fittings in the lounge were broken and required replacement at an invoiced cost of $184.00. This is awarded in full.
The damages above are more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved.
I have considered betterment and depreciation but none is found applicable here. Filing fee
Because Barfoot & Thompson Limited As Agent For Chan, Helen L K; Raisat, Imran S A has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Order

Ladeana Gibbs and Ra Newman must pay Barfoot & Thompson Limited As Agent For Chan, Helen L K; Raisat, Imran S A $2,353.95 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing, conducted via teleconference. Two calls to the tenants went unanswered. I was satisfied adequate service had completed and I continued with the hearing after the second call also went unanswered.
The landlord has had recent text communication from the tenant’s number.
The landlord had applied for rent arrears, water rates, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
A prior order released the bond, given the rent arrears established. That order also detailed further claims by the landlord, received late, to be determined at this hearing.

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

The tenancy ended on 16 November 2024. The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amounts owing at the end of the tenancy are as ordered.

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 as there was a lingering dog odour that took extensive cleaning to remove. The walls also required cleaning due to pet staining. The landlord provided invoices for the cleaning and these are awarded in full.
The lawns were overgrown and a contractor invoice for mowing the lawns ($115.00) established the cost to remedy.
The heat pump remote were missing at the end of the tenancy and replaced at a cost of $39.98.
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.
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: a. Wardrobe door. A bedroom wardrobe door was badly scratched, more than likely by the dog. The landlord provided ingoing comparative photos to confirm the damage occurred during the tenancy. The invoice for repainting the door ($416.30) was produced to establish the loss. This is awarded in full. b. Electrical fittings. Electrical fittings in the lounge were broken and required replacement at an invoiced cost of $184.00. This is awarded in full.
The damages above are more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved.
I have considered betterment and depreciation but none is found applicable here. Filing fee
Because Barfoot & Thompson Limited As Agent For Chan, Helen L K; Raisat, Imran S A has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5092110 — Rent arrears at 14 Thomas Road, Flat Bush, Auckland 2019

Tenancy Tribunal case 5092110 — Rent arrears at 14 Thomas Road, Flat Bush, Auckland 2019

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?

Property management

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?

Property management