Published tribunal order
Tenancy Tribunal case 5121303 — Rent arrears
Decided 10 Apr 2025 · Published 10 Apr 2025 · Application 5121303
- Rent arrears
- Property damage
Party names are redacted in the official published order.
Order
- An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name and identifying details.
- The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,120.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.
- Trinh Thi HA and Nguyen Van HAO must pay [The landlord/s] $14,086.48 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
Reasons
- Only the landlord attended the hearing. I am satisfied that the tenants have been served with the landlord’s application in accordance with the provisions of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) and so the hearing proceeded in the tenants’ absence.
- The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
- The tenancy was terminated by order of this Tribunal on 21 November 2024 and possession was granted to the landlord immediately.
- The landlord had applied to terminate the tenancy through the expedited process for abandonment under section 91AA RTA. The landlord had become aware that the tenants had abandoned the property when they received notification from the police that they had conducted a search warrant at the property and uncovered an extensive cannabis growing operation.
- The landlord entered the property after giving notice and found the property dirty, full of rubbish and extensively damaged.
How much is owed for rent and water rates?
- The landlord sought rent arrears to the termination date. They provided a rent summary proving that the amount of $1,661.43 was owing at the end of the tenancy.
- The landlord also provided water invoices and a tenancy ledger showing that the sum of 148.70 was owing for water.
- The landlord’s claims for rent and water arrears are proved. Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy and are they responsible for damage to the premises?
- 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) RTA.
- 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.
- 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). See section 49B(3)(a) RTA.
- 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). See section 49B(3)(b) RTA. Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. See section 49B(3A)(a) RTA.
- 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) 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. Cleaning, rubbish removal and damage
- The landlord explained that when they entered the property they discovered that all three bedrooms had been used for growing cannabis plants. Large holes had been cut through the ceiling, floor and walls and ducting had been installed. Additional wiring had been installed and a large number of wires were left hanging out of holes in the ceiling and in the wall in the hallway. The floor and windows had been covered in plastic sheeting and holes had been drilled along the walls and ceilings cornices and in various door frames. Hooks were then installed to allow lines to be strung up across ceilings and walls. Fittings had been removed from the shower and hosing installed.
- The landlord said that, in addition to the damage: a. the tenants left behind a huge amount of rubbish including a large number of pots, soil, buckets, stakes, plastic stools, beakers and plastic containers, various furniture including a mattress and a couch, pots and pans, a fridge and pantry full of food and various miscellaneous items; and b. the property was very unclean throughout including the carpet, bathrooms and kitchen.
- The landlord produced an invoice in the amount of $19,863.80 for cleaning, rubbish removal, floor, wall and ceiling repairs, wall and ceiling repainting, carpet replacement, repairs to the smartvent system and deodorising the property (including washing all curtains).
- The landlord advised that they had made a claim against their insurance and had been awarded a cash settlement of $5,903.29 (and provided a copy of correspondence with the insurer). They therefore seek the balance, being $13,960.51.
- The landlord has proved that the tenants did not leave the property clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
- The landlord has proved, by producing both ingoing and outgoing inspection reports, that the damage occurred during the tenancy. The damage is more than fair wear and tear. Almost all of the damage appears to be intentional.
- This was a very short tenancy which began on February 2024. The ingoing inspection photos show all the areas which have been damaged to be in good condition with the exception of the carpet which appears to have some staining. I have considered whether a deduction should be made for the carpet replacement but have decided against doing so as it appears that the cash settlement from the landlord’s insurer was made primarily for the replacement of the carpet. All of the other repairs appear to have simply returned the landlord to the position that they would have been in if the tenants had not caused the damage.
- The claim for cleaning, rubbish removal and repairs is proved. Locks
- The tenants did not leave any keys for the property. The landlord provided photos showing the keys given to the tenant at the start of the tenancy.
- The landlord provided an invoice from Mobile Dot Com for replacing locks in the amount of $207.00.
- This claim is proved. Electrical
- The landlord had to have an electrician inspect the wiring that had been installed, remove that wiring, and do all necessary repairs.
- The landlord provided two invoices from Nova Electrical totalling $747.50 who attended to check the electrical work and returned to remove and repair the wiring.
- The landlord’s claim for compensation for the electrical invoice is proved. Skip bin
- The landlord’s claim above for rubbish removal included the removal of the rubbish from the house but not the disposal of the rubbish. The landlord had to arrange for a skip bin and produced an invoice from Auckland Waste for a 9m3 skip in the amount of $454.25. This claim is proved. Filing fee and name suppression
- Because [The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee of $27.00.
- The landlord sought an order for name suppression and is entitled to an order as the successful party (see section 95A RTA).