What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5138009?

The tribunal order states: Donna White and Gemma Flavell must pay Caijuan (Rose) Yan and Yong Zhu

How much money was awarded in case 5138009?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: Carpet – contri…: $1,500.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5138009?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5138009?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11842284-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5138009?

The tribunal order states: Donna White and Gemma Flavell must pay Caijuan (Rose) Yan and Yong Zhu

How much money was awarded in case 5138009?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: Carpet – contri…: $1,500.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5138009?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5138009?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11842284-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

23B Chadwick Road, Greerton, Tauranga 3112 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5138009 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5138009 — net $2,027.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 11/12/24 less bond	$500.00	Rent arrears to 11/12/24 less bond
Replace furnishings: Carpet – contribution to excess	$1,500.00	Replace furnishings: Carpet – contribution to excess
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,027.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,027.00

Order

Donna White and Gemma Flavell must pay Caijuan (Rose) Yan and Yong Zhu $2,027.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord and their property manager attended the hearing. The tenants did not attend the hearing. Calls to each of the tenant’s last known mobile numbers went to voicemail.
Following the end of the tenancy, the landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation for damage to carpet, and reimbursement of the filing fee.
The tenancy was a fixed-term tenancy. The tenant moved out of the premises on 11 December 2024. Burden and standard of proof
The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards.
That includes a requirement that the party bringing the claim (the applicant), establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. The balance of probabilities means more likely than unlikely, or in mathematical terms, has a fraction more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely.
This obligation carried by the applicant 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.

How much is owed for rent?

The landlord provided rent records which prove that as at 11 December 2024, the tenant owed the landlord $3,300.00 in rent.
The landlord says the bond of $2,800.00 was refunded to the landlord in January 2025, therefore, the amount owing in rent arrears is $500.00.
I make an order accordingly.

How much is owed for water rates?

The landlord says the tenant owes the landlord $324.07 in unpaid water rates.
In support of the claim, the landlord filed an invoice from Tauranga City Council dated 12 December 2024 which states $324.07 is owing in relation to the premises.
However, the invoice includes charges for base charges, penalties and a balance carried forward of $231.87.
The landlord was given the opportunity to file further evidence in support of the claim for unpaid water rates. The landlord was reminded that the tenant is only liable for water consumption charges, and not for fixed (base) charges.
The landlord filed the following additional invoices from Tauranga City Council: a. Invoice for water consumption between 30/11/23 – 21/02/24 for $156.70; b. Invoice for consumption between 21/02/24 – 14/05/24 for $162.61; c. Invoice for consumption between 14/05/24 – 30/06/24 for $79.83; d. Invoice for consumption between 01/07/24 – 14/08/24 for $80.03; e. Invoice for consumption between 14/08/24 – 06/11/24 for $193.93; and f. Invoice for consumption between 06/11/24 – 11/12/24 for $76.96.
The above invoices come to a total of $750.06.
The landlord has not provided records of payments that have been made by the tenant towards these water rates. Given the landlord seeks $324.07, it would appear the tenant has made some payments towards water rates.
The landlord has not provided a full record of water rates (for consumption only) charged to the tenant and payments made by the tenant. As a result, I am not satisfied the landlord has proved it is more likely than not that the tenant owes the landlord further compensation for water rates, and if so, the amount owed.
I dismiss the landlord’s claim for unpaid water rates.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the carpet?

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.
During the hearing, the property manager Mr Joshua Fitzgibbon described visiting the premises on 29 November 2024 and 10 December 2024. On both occasions Mr Fitzgibbon says there was an overpowering smell of car urine in the premises. Mr Fitzgibbon advised the landlord the carpet would need to be cleaned or replaced before new tenants could move in.
The landlords made a claim on their insurance, proof of which was provided with their application. Their insurance claim was accepted, and they seek compensation for the excess paid for each of the 5 rooms that required re- carpeting, as determined by the insurance company. The total amount sought is $2,750.00.
The landlords say the carpet was installed new in 2020. They say it was replaced with a carpet of a similar quality in January 2025. An invoice from the carpet installer was provided in support of their application.
I accept Mr Fitzgibbons’ evidence that the premises smelled strongly of cat urine when he visited in November and December 2024, and therefore I am satisfied the tenants caused damage to the carpet. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
Before making an award, I must take into account depreciation of the carpet that was damaged, and also the concept of betterment. The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached their obligations, and should not be better or worse off.
In calculating depreciation, I have taken into account the carpet was five years old at the time it was replaced. I did not receive evidence proving the condition of the carpet at the start of the tenancy, however the landlord said it was installed new in 2020. I note that carpet in a residential rental property usually has a useful lifespan of eight years. 1
The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached their obligations, and should not be better or worse off. The landlord would not have needed to replace the carpet if the tenant had not damaged it with cat urine. However, by replacing the carpet the landlord benefits in that their property now has brand new carpet.
Taking these factors into consideration, I consider it reasonable that the tenant compensate the landlord $1,500 towards the excess payable for the replacement carpet.
I make an order accordingly. 1 General Depreciation Rates, Inland Revenue, IR265 October 2023. Should the tenant reimburse the landlord’s application fee?
As the landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim the tenant must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5138009 — net $2,027.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 11/12/24 less bond	$500.00	Rent arrears to 11/12/24 less bond
Replace furnishings: Carpet – contribution to excess	$1,500.00	Replace furnishings: Carpet – contribution to excess
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,027.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,027.00

Order

Donna White and Gemma Flavell must pay Caijuan (Rose) Yan and Yong Zhu $2,027.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord and their property manager attended the hearing. The tenants did not attend the hearing. Calls to each of the tenant’s last known mobile numbers went to voicemail.
Following the end of the tenancy, the landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation for damage to carpet, and reimbursement of the filing fee.
The tenancy was a fixed-term tenancy. The tenant moved out of the premises on 11 December 2024. Burden and standard of proof
The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards.
That includes a requirement that the party bringing the claim (the applicant), establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. The balance of probabilities means more likely than unlikely, or in mathematical terms, has a fraction more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely.
This obligation carried by the applicant 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.

How much is owed for rent?

The landlord provided rent records which prove that as at 11 December 2024, the tenant owed the landlord $3,300.00 in rent.
The landlord says the bond of $2,800.00 was refunded to the landlord in January 2025, therefore, the amount owing in rent arrears is $500.00.
I make an order accordingly.

How much is owed for water rates?

The landlord says the tenant owes the landlord $324.07 in unpaid water rates.
In support of the claim, the landlord filed an invoice from Tauranga City Council dated 12 December 2024 which states $324.07 is owing in relation to the premises.
However, the invoice includes charges for base charges, penalties and a balance carried forward of $231.87.
The landlord was given the opportunity to file further evidence in support of the claim for unpaid water rates. The landlord was reminded that the tenant is only liable for water consumption charges, and not for fixed (base) charges.
The landlord filed the following additional invoices from Tauranga City Council: a. Invoice for water consumption between 30/11/23 – 21/02/24 for $156.70; b. Invoice for consumption between 21/02/24 – 14/05/24 for $162.61; c. Invoice for consumption between 14/05/24 – 30/06/24 for $79.83; d. Invoice for consumption between 01/07/24 – 14/08/24 for $80.03; e. Invoice for consumption between 14/08/24 – 06/11/24 for $193.93; and f. Invoice for consumption between 06/11/24 – 11/12/24 for $76.96.
The above invoices come to a total of $750.06.
The landlord has not provided records of payments that have been made by the tenant towards these water rates. Given the landlord seeks $324.07, it would appear the tenant has made some payments towards water rates.
The landlord has not provided a full record of water rates (for consumption only) charged to the tenant and payments made by the tenant. As a result, I am not satisfied the landlord has proved it is more likely than not that the tenant owes the landlord further compensation for water rates, and if so, the amount owed.
I dismiss the landlord’s claim for unpaid water rates.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the carpet?

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.
During the hearing, the property manager Mr Joshua Fitzgibbon described visiting the premises on 29 November 2024 and 10 December 2024. On both occasions Mr Fitzgibbon says there was an overpowering smell of car urine in the premises. Mr Fitzgibbon advised the landlord the carpet would need to be cleaned or replaced before new tenants could move in.
The landlords made a claim on their insurance, proof of which was provided with their application. Their insurance claim was accepted, and they seek compensation for the excess paid for each of the 5 rooms that required re- carpeting, as determined by the insurance company. The total amount sought is $2,750.00.
The landlords say the carpet was installed new in 2020. They say it was replaced with a carpet of a similar quality in January 2025. An invoice from the carpet installer was provided in support of their application.
I accept Mr Fitzgibbons’ evidence that the premises smelled strongly of cat urine when he visited in November and December 2024, and therefore I am satisfied the tenants caused damage to the carpet. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
Before making an award, I must take into account depreciation of the carpet that was damaged, and also the concept of betterment. The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached their obligations, and should not be better or worse off.
In calculating depreciation, I have taken into account the carpet was five years old at the time it was replaced. I did not receive evidence proving the condition of the carpet at the start of the tenancy, however the landlord said it was installed new in 2020. I note that carpet in a residential rental property usually has a useful lifespan of eight years. 1
The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached their obligations, and should not be better or worse off. The landlord would not have needed to replace the carpet if the tenant had not damaged it with cat urine. However, by replacing the carpet the landlord benefits in that their property now has brand new carpet.
Taking these factors into consideration, I consider it reasonable that the tenant compensate the landlord $1,500 towards the excess payable for the replacement carpet.
I make an order accordingly. 1 General Depreciation Rates, Inland Revenue, IR265 October 2023. Should the tenant reimburse the landlord’s application fee?
As the landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim the tenant must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5138009 — Rent arrears at 23B Chadwick Road, Greerton, Tauranga 3112

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5138009 — Rent arrears at 23B Chadwick Road, Greerton, Tauranga 3112

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

How much is owed for water rates?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the carpet?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

How much is owed for water rates?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the carpet?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions