What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5138589?

The tribunal order states: Emma Joyce and Robert Barron to pay Candise Heremaia $120.00 from the

How much money was awarded in case 5138589?

Compensation: $120.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5138589?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5138589?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11776328-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5138589?

The tribunal order states: Emma Joyce and Robert Barron to pay Candise Heremaia $120.00 from the

How much money was awarded in case 5138589?

Compensation: $120.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5138589?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5138589?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11776328-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

20 Glamorgan Avenue, Tamatea, Napier 4112 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5138589 — Tenancy dispute

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5138589 — net $120.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Compensation for stained curtain	$120.00	Compensation for stained curtain
Net award	$120.00
Bond	$2,600.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$120.00

Both parties attended the hearing by video conference with Ms Joyce appearing for the tenants.

The tenant has applied for refund of the bond.

The landlord has a claim against the bond but has not filed a counterclaim with Tenancy Services.

Section 22B(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that, where a tenant applies for refund of the bond, and the landlord seeks payment from the bond, the landlord must file an application setting out the details of the counterclaim. Where the landlord has not filed a counterclaim, the bond may be refunded in full to the tenant. However, the landlord only wishes to pursue one claim about which the tenant is fully aware and is able to answer. Therefore, I am satisfied that it is appropriate to deal with the claim.

Is the tenant responsible for curtain damage?

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 damage is proved and the item needs to be replaced, I must consider betterment and depreciation. 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 must take into account the age and condition of the item at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.

It is not disputed that there was small blackish mark on one of the light-coloured curtains in the lounge at the end of the tenancy. The landlord says she tried to wash the curtain but the stain did not come out. She did not have the curtain professionally cleaned or drycleaned and she seeks the cost to replace it.

The same curtain (which only comes in a set of two) is available from Curtain Studio. The landlord provided the tenant with a screen shot of the curtains and their advertised cost at Curtain Studio in November 2024. They were priced at $369.99. However, I note that the same curtains are currently being advertised at Curtain Studio for the discounted price of $295.99. The landlord confirms that she has not yet replaced the curtain.

The landlord says the curtains were installed new in or about March/April 2023, which would make them 2 years and 8 months old when the tenancy ended and three years old at the hearing date, which is the relevant date given that the landlord has not yet replaced the curtains. Current depreciation guidelines estimate that curtains in a rental property have a life of approximately 8 years. Therefore, if I awarded the landlord the replacement cost of the curtains, I would base the costs on the current discounted price advertised and would reduce the cost further for depreciation by 37.5% (3/8 years).

I am satisfied that the curtain mark is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the cost to remove the mark and/or, if the mark cannot be removed by cleaning, the cost to replace the curtain. The issue is whether the landlord is entitled to curtain replacement costs when it is not clear whether the mark might be removed by professional cleaning first. The tenant’s response to the claim was that she was happy to pay for the curtain to be cleaned.

I am not satisfied on the evidence that the landlord has proved that the curtain cannot be remedied by cleaning. Therefore she has not proved that the curtains must be replaced.

However, I consider that it is fair to award some compensation which the landlord can put towards either cleaning or replacing the curtain. I consider a reasonable allowance for curtain drycleaning is a maximum of $120 which I award.

Given that a sum is to be deducted from the bond to compensate the landlord, I do not order reimbursement of the filing fee paid by the tenant.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5138589 — net $120.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Compensation for stained curtain	$120.00	Compensation for stained curtain
Net award	$120.00
Bond	$2,600.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$120.00

Order

Emma Joyce and Robert Barron to pay Candise Heremaia $120.00 from the bond, calculated as shown in the table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,600.00 (6461572-001) immediately apportioned as follows: Candise Heremaia: $120.00 Emma Joyce and Robert Barron: $2,480.00

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing by video conference with Ms Joyce appearing for the tenants.
The tenant has applied for refund of the bond.
The landlord has a claim against the bond but has not filed a counterclaim with Tenancy Services.
Section 22B(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that, where a tenant applies for refund of the bond, and the landlord seeks payment from the bond, the landlord must file an application setting out the details of the counterclaim. Where the landlord has not filed a counterclaim, the bond may be refunded in full to the tenant. However, the landlord only wishes to pursue one claim about which the tenant is fully aware and is able to answer. Therefore, I am satisfied that it is appropriate to deal with the claim.

Is the tenant responsible for curtain damage?

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 damage is proved and the item needs to be replaced, I must consider betterment and depreciation. 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 must take into account the age and condition of the item at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.
It is not disputed that there was small blackish mark on one of the light-coloured curtains in the lounge at the end of the tenancy. The landlord says she tried to wash the curtain but the stain did not come out. She did not have the curtain professionally cleaned or drycleaned and she seeks the cost to replace it.
The same curtain (which only comes in a set of two) is available from Curtain Studio. The landlord provided the tenant with a screen shot of the curtains and their advertised cost at Curtain Studio in November 2024. They were priced at $369.99. However, I note that the same curtains are currently being advertised at Curtain Studio for the discounted price of $295.99. The landlord confirms that she has not yet replaced the curtain.
The landlord says the curtains were installed new in or about March/April 2023, which would make them 2 years and 8 months old when the tenancy ended and three years old at the hearing date, which is the relevant date given that the landlord has not yet replaced the curtains. Current depreciation guidelines estimate that curtains in a rental property have a life of approximately 8 years. Therefore, if I awarded the landlord the replacement cost of the curtains, I would base the costs on the current discounted price advertised and would reduce the cost further for depreciation by 37.5% (3/8 years).
I am satisfied that the curtain mark is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the cost to remove the mark and/or, if the mark cannot be removed by cleaning, the cost to replace the curtain. The issue is whether the landlord is entitled to curtain replacement costs when it is not clear whether the mark might be removed by professional cleaning first. The tenant’s response to the claim was that she was happy to pay for the curtain to be cleaned.
I am not satisfied on the evidence that the landlord has proved that the curtain cannot be remedied by cleaning. Therefore she has not proved that the curtains must be replaced.
However, I consider that it is fair to award some compensation which the landlord can put towards either cleaning or replacing the curtain. I consider a reasonable allowance for curtain drycleaning is a maximum of $120 which I award.
Given that a sum is to be deducted from the bond to compensate the landlord, I do not order reimbursement of the filing fee paid by the tenant.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5138589 — Tenancy dispute at 20 Glamorgan Avenue, Tamatea, Napier 4112

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5138589 — Tenancy dispute at 20 Glamorgan Avenue, Tamatea, Napier 4112

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Is the tenant responsible for curtain damage?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Is the tenant responsible for curtain damage?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions