What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5131050 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 5131050?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $400.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $411.22 awarded to landlord

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5131050?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11470722-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5131050 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 5131050?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $400.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $411.22 awarded to landlord

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5131050?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11470722-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5131050 — Leaks

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5131050. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Water rates	$411.22	Water rates
Repairs – unblock plumbing	$400.00	Repairs – unblock plumbing

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord and the Tenants’ names and identifying details.
The Tenants must pay $838.22 to the Landlord, comprised of:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The Tenants were represented by their daughter.
The Landlord seeks to recover the following costs: a. $411.22 for water charges between 11 January 2023 and 7 December 2023. b. $977.50 for the cost of unblocking a clogged sewage pump at the premises. c. $249 for the cost of advertising the premises for rent on TradeMe in August 2024 after the Tenant indicated that they would vacate the premises.
The Tenants agree that they are liable for the water rates but dispute the other amounts. Water Rates
Under section 38(3) and (4) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the RTA), a Tenant is responsible for all outgoings in respect of the premises that are exclusively attributable to the tenant’s occupation of the premises or to the tenant’s use of the facilities, including for the supply of water if the water supplier charges for water provided to the premises on the basis of consumption.
Water is supplied to the premises by Watercare and is charged on the basis of consumption. Although the Watercare invoice for the period 11 January 2023 to 7 December 2023 contains an aggregated charge for the water consumed across several different premises, the Landlord has been able to calculate the water charges for the Tenants’ premises because those premises have a water meter, from which the relevant consumption figures can be derived.
The Landlord’s water reading shows that water charges of $411.22 are directly attributable to the Tenants’ premises. The Tenants are liable for that amount. Plumbing charges
The premises have a vacuum wastewater pump that pumps waste from the toilet into the wastewater system. The vacuum wastewater pump for the premises was blocked in July 2024. The pump was unblocked by The Drain Company and the Landlord seeks to recover the $977.50 cost of that repair from the Tenants because it says that the wastewater pump was blocked by wet wipes flushed down the toilet.
I accept the Landlord’s evidence that the wastewater pump was blocked by wet wipes flushed down the toilet. The Landlord produced three photographs taken by the plumber that show the presence of wet wipes in the sewage system.
Those wet wipes were flushed down the toilet during the Tenants’ occupation of the premises because they have been the only occupants of the premises, which were new when they moved in. The Tenants also accept that they used wet wipes. They say that the wet wipes they used were “flushable” and marketed as “safe to flush”, so they do not think they should be liable for the cost of repair.
Under section 40(2) of the RTA, the Tenants have an obligation not to carelessly damage the premises. I am satisfied that the Tenants were careless when flushing wet wipes down the toilet. I consider it to be common knowledge that wet wipes should not be flushed due to the risk of blockages in the sewage system. The fact that the wet wipes used by the Tenants may have been marketed as flushable and safe to flush does not change that view. The evidence clearly shows that the wet wipes flushed by the Tenants blocked the vacuum wastewater pump.
The Landlord is therefore entitled to recover the cost of repairs up to the lesser of the cost of its insurance excess or four weeks rent – see section 49B(3)(a) of the RTA. The Tenancy Agreement between the parties records that the insurance excess is $400, which is less than four weeks rent. The Landlord did not demonstrate that the damage was not covered by the Landlord’s insurance policy, so I proceed on the basis that it was. I therefore award $400 to the Landlord. TradeMe invoice
In August 2024, the Tenants advised the Landlord that they intended to vacate the premises. In response, the Landlord advertised the premises for rent on TradeMe. The Tenants then changed their minds and decided to stay. The Landlord has allowed the Tenants to remain, but now wants to recover the $249 cost of advertising the property.
I accept that the Landlord has incurred this cost in response to the Tenants advice that they would leave the premises, but I am not satisfied that the Tenant is liable for this cost. That is because the Tenants’ conduct does not breach the tenancy agreement or any of the obligations in the RTA, so I cannot order that it is liable for that cost. See section 77(2)(n) of the RTA.
The Landlords’ claim to recover this cost is therefore dismissed. Filing fee and suppression
The Landlord has been largely successful in its claim, so it is entitled to recover the filing fee - see section 102(4)(b) of the RTA – and to name suppression – see section 95A(1) of the RTA.
I also grant name suppression for the Tenants. They have successfully defended significant aspects of the claim. I am also satisfied, for the reasons discussed during the hearing, that there are good medical and personal reasons for allowing suppression.
After the hearing, the Tenants advised that, if any sum is awarded against them, they will need to enter into a payment plan for repayment. Any payment arrangement is to be decided between the parties, but I encourage the parties to co-operate on the repayment of the amounts I have ordered.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5131050. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Water rates	$411.22	Water rates
Repairs – unblock plumbing	$400.00	Repairs – unblock plumbing

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord and the Tenants’ names and identifying details.
The Tenants must pay $838.22 to the Landlord, comprised of:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The Tenants were represented by their daughter.
The Landlord seeks to recover the following costs: a. $411.22 for water charges between 11 January 2023 and 7 December 2023. b. $977.50 for the cost of unblocking a clogged sewage pump at the premises. c. $249 for the cost of advertising the premises for rent on TradeMe in August 2024 after the Tenant indicated that they would vacate the premises.
The Tenants agree that they are liable for the water rates but dispute the other amounts. Water Rates
Under section 38(3) and (4) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the RTA), a Tenant is responsible for all outgoings in respect of the premises that are exclusively attributable to the tenant’s occupation of the premises or to the tenant’s use of the facilities, including for the supply of water if the water supplier charges for water provided to the premises on the basis of consumption.
Water is supplied to the premises by Watercare and is charged on the basis of consumption. Although the Watercare invoice for the period 11 January 2023 to 7 December 2023 contains an aggregated charge for the water consumed across several different premises, the Landlord has been able to calculate the water charges for the Tenants’ premises because those premises have a water meter, from which the relevant consumption figures can be derived.
The Landlord’s water reading shows that water charges of $411.22 are directly attributable to the Tenants’ premises. The Tenants are liable for that amount. Plumbing charges
The premises have a vacuum wastewater pump that pumps waste from the toilet into the wastewater system. The vacuum wastewater pump for the premises was blocked in July 2024. The pump was unblocked by The Drain Company and the Landlord seeks to recover the $977.50 cost of that repair from the Tenants because it says that the wastewater pump was blocked by wet wipes flushed down the toilet.
I accept the Landlord’s evidence that the wastewater pump was blocked by wet wipes flushed down the toilet. The Landlord produced three photographs taken by the plumber that show the presence of wet wipes in the sewage system.
Those wet wipes were flushed down the toilet during the Tenants’ occupation of the premises because they have been the only occupants of the premises, which were new when they moved in. The Tenants also accept that they used wet wipes. They say that the wet wipes they used were “flushable” and marketed as “safe to flush”, so they do not think they should be liable for the cost of repair.
Under section 40(2) of the RTA, the Tenants have an obligation not to carelessly damage the premises. I am satisfied that the Tenants were careless when flushing wet wipes down the toilet. I consider it to be common knowledge that wet wipes should not be flushed due to the risk of blockages in the sewage system. The fact that the wet wipes used by the Tenants may have been marketed as flushable and safe to flush does not change that view. The evidence clearly shows that the wet wipes flushed by the Tenants blocked the vacuum wastewater pump.
The Landlord is therefore entitled to recover the cost of repairs up to the lesser of the cost of its insurance excess or four weeks rent – see section 49B(3)(a) of the RTA. The Tenancy Agreement between the parties records that the insurance excess is $400, which is less than four weeks rent. The Landlord did not demonstrate that the damage was not covered by the Landlord’s insurance policy, so I proceed on the basis that it was. I therefore award $400 to the Landlord. TradeMe invoice
In August 2024, the Tenants advised the Landlord that they intended to vacate the premises. In response, the Landlord advertised the premises for rent on TradeMe. The Tenants then changed their minds and decided to stay. The Landlord has allowed the Tenants to remain, but now wants to recover the $249 cost of advertising the property.
I accept that the Landlord has incurred this cost in response to the Tenants advice that they would leave the premises, but I am not satisfied that the Tenant is liable for this cost. That is because the Tenants’ conduct does not breach the tenancy agreement or any of the obligations in the RTA, so I cannot order that it is liable for that cost. See section 77(2)(n) of the RTA.
The Landlords’ claim to recover this cost is therefore dismissed. Filing fee and suppression
The Landlord has been largely successful in its claim, so it is entitled to recover the filing fee - see section 102(4)(b) of the RTA – and to name suppression – see section 95A(1) of the RTA.
I also grant name suppression for the Tenants. They have successfully defended significant aspects of the claim. I am also satisfied, for the reasons discussed during the hearing, that there are good medical and personal reasons for allowing suppression.
After the hearing, the Tenants advised that, if any sum is awarded against them, they will need to enter into a payment plan for repayment. Any payment arrangement is to be decided between the parties, but I encourage the parties to co-operate on the repayment of the amounts I have ordered.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5131050 — Leaks

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5131050 — Leaks

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions