What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5101628 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 5101628?

Cleaning: $462.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $475.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $567.58 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $207.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5101628?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5101628?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11313563-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5101628 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 5101628?

Cleaning: $462.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $475.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $567.58 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $207.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5101628?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5101628?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11313563-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

55 Salford Street, Newlands, Wellington 6037 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5101628 — Cleanliness

Tenantcheck Insights

55 Salford Street, Newlands, Wellington 6037 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5101628 — 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 5101628 — net $861.42 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Cleaning	$475.00		Cleaning
Carpet Cleaning	$462.00		Carpet Cleaning
Lock/key replacement: including the ranch slider and front	$567.58		Lock/key replacement: including the ranch slider and front
Rubbish removal	$207.00		Rubbish removal
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00		Filing fee reimbursement
Bond already refunded		$2,600.00	Bond already refunded
Total award	$1,738.58	$2,600.00
Net award		$861.42
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant		$861.42

Claims and awards for application 5101628 — net $861.42 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Cleaning

Amount: $475.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning

Carpet Cleaning

Amount: $462.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Carpet Cleaning

Lock/key replacement: including the ranch slider and front

Amount: $567.58
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lock/key replacement: including the ranch slider and front

Rubbish removal

Amount: $207.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal

Filing fee reimbursement

Amount: $27.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Filing fee reimbursement

Dismissed claims

Other Claims — All other claims dismissed

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Carpet Cleaning Cleanliness Filing Fee Property damage Rubbish Removal

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord name and identifying details.
[The landlord/s] must pay Jordan Monica Nikora $861.42 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The landlord made a one party application for the Bond after the application was filed. The Bond Centre paid the bond of $0.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to the landlord.

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

Tenants must keep the premises reasonably clean and tidy during the tenancy, and they must return them in a reasonably clean and tidy state and remove their rubbish at the end of the tenancy. See section 40(1)(c) and (e)(iii) Residential Tenancies Act (RTA).
In Ace Property Management v Owens (DC Wellington, CIV-2008-085-14441, 17 December 2008) the District Court said: A tenant’s obligation pursuant to the Act to leave a property in a “reasonably clean and reasonably tidy condition” does not mean that it will necessarily be up to a standard that a landlord may consider for a new tenant. It is a mistake for landlords to confuse those two matters.
The RTA does not require the premises to be provided or returned in a spotless or an immaculate condition. The standard is based on what an average bystander would consider reasonable, not on the subjective opinions of the landlord and tenant. There is no scientific way to determine what is reasonably clean and tidy, and the Tribunal must evaluate the evidence available, and in particular inspection reports and photographs.
The landlord took photos at the end of the tenancy and I was provided with an ingoing inspection report. I can see the tenant did not remove all her belongings at the end of the tenancy and that the house needed further cleaning. I have considered the evidence provided and I find $475 is a reasonable amount for cleaning. The cost for removing the rubbish and belongings seems reasonable and $207 is allowed.
The landlord said the tenant did not return any keys and that she had keys for the laundry and porch doors and for the ranch slider during the tenancy. There was also a code on the front door that had to be changed. The amount ordered is proved.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

There is a claim for repairs to one kitchen cupboard door and to the deck. The landlord must prove that damage to the premises occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA.
I have considered the photos. This was the only damage claimed by the landlord. The kitchen door could have come loose because of fair wear and tear. The few boards on the deck that needed replacing also look to be the result of fair wear and tear, even taking the tenant’s rubbish into account. I am not persuaded by the landlord’s evidence and this claim is dismissed. Other orders
The landlord is required to refund the remaining bond to the tenant.
Because the landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.
The landlord’s application for suppression is allowed because the landlord is the most successful party. See section 95A RTA.

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 5101628 — net $861.42 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Cleaning	$475.00		Cleaning
Carpet Cleaning	$462.00		Carpet Cleaning
Lock/key replacement: including the ranch slider and front	$567.58		Lock/key replacement: including the ranch slider and front
Rubbish removal	$207.00		Rubbish removal
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00		Filing fee reimbursement
Bond already refunded		$2,600.00	Bond already refunded
Total award	$1,738.58	$2,600.00
Net award		$861.42
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant		$861.42

Claims and awards for application 5101628 — net $861.42 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Cleaning

Amount: $475.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning

Carpet Cleaning

Amount: $462.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Carpet Cleaning

Lock/key replacement: including the ranch slider and front

Amount: $567.58
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lock/key replacement: including the ranch slider and front

Rubbish removal

Amount: $207.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal

Filing fee reimbursement

Amount: $27.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Filing fee reimbursement

Dismissed claims

Other Claims — All other claims dismissed

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Carpet Cleaning Cleanliness Filing Fee Property damage Rubbish Removal

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord name and identifying details.
[The landlord/s] must pay Jordan Monica Nikora $861.42 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The landlord made a one party application for the Bond after the application was filed. The Bond Centre paid the bond of $0.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to the landlord.

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

Tenants must keep the premises reasonably clean and tidy during the tenancy, and they must return them in a reasonably clean and tidy state and remove their rubbish at the end of the tenancy. See section 40(1)(c) and (e)(iii) Residential Tenancies Act (RTA).
In Ace Property Management v Owens (DC Wellington, CIV-2008-085-14441, 17 December 2008) the District Court said: A tenant’s obligation pursuant to the Act to leave a property in a “reasonably clean and reasonably tidy condition” does not mean that it will necessarily be up to a standard that a landlord may consider for a new tenant. It is a mistake for landlords to confuse those two matters.
The RTA does not require the premises to be provided or returned in a spotless or an immaculate condition. The standard is based on what an average bystander would consider reasonable, not on the subjective opinions of the landlord and tenant. There is no scientific way to determine what is reasonably clean and tidy, and the Tribunal must evaluate the evidence available, and in particular inspection reports and photographs.
The landlord took photos at the end of the tenancy and I was provided with an ingoing inspection report. I can see the tenant did not remove all her belongings at the end of the tenancy and that the house needed further cleaning. I have considered the evidence provided and I find $475 is a reasonable amount for cleaning. The cost for removing the rubbish and belongings seems reasonable and $207 is allowed.
The landlord said the tenant did not return any keys and that she had keys for the laundry and porch doors and for the ranch slider during the tenancy. There was also a code on the front door that had to be changed. The amount ordered is proved.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

There is a claim for repairs to one kitchen cupboard door and to the deck. The landlord must prove that damage to the premises occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA.
I have considered the photos. This was the only damage claimed by the landlord. The kitchen door could have come loose because of fair wear and tear. The few boards on the deck that needed replacing also look to be the result of fair wear and tear, even taking the tenant’s rubbish into account. I am not persuaded by the landlord’s evidence and this claim is dismissed. Other orders
The landlord is required to refund the remaining bond to the tenant.
Because the landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.
The landlord’s application for suppression is allowed because the landlord is the most successful party. See section 95A RTA.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5101628 — Cleanliness at 55 Salford Street, Newlands, Wellington 6037

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5101628 — Cleanliness at 55 Salford Street, Newlands, Wellington 6037

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Did the tenant comply with her 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

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Did the tenant comply with her 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