What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5140869 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 5140869?

Rubbish Removal: $920.00 awarded to landlord; Electrician Fee - Heatpump: $125.35 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,718.57 awarded to landlord; - Plumbing Fee: $175.54 awarded to landlord; - Wooden Floor: $500.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5140869?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage, Leaks.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5140869?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11765283-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5140869 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 5140869?

Rubbish Removal: $920.00 awarded to landlord; Electrician Fee - Heatpump: $125.35 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,718.57 awarded to landlord; - Plumbing Fee: $175.54 awarded to landlord; - Wooden Floor: $500.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5140869?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage, Leaks.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5140869?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11765283-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5140869 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5140869 — net $1,906.46 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 10/12/24	$2,718.57	Rent arrears to 10/12/24
Cleaning: and rubbish removal	$920.00	Cleaning: and rubbish removal
Repairs: - wooden floor	$500.00	Repairs: - wooden floor
Repairs: - plumbing fee	$175.54	Repairs: - plumbing fee
Electrician fee - Heatpump	$125.35	Electrician fee - Heatpump
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,906.46
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,906.46

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
Daisy Anne Heremaia and Cajun Kelly Klescovich-Pairama must pay [The landlord/s] $1,906.46 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The balance of the claims are dismissed.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing by video call.
The tenants did not connect to the remote hearing and were telephoned on the phone numbers provided but the phone calls went unanswered. I am satisfied the tenants were properly served with notice of the hearing. The hearing proceeded in their absence.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, payment of the bond and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Relevant legal considerations
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 and expectations. That includes a requirement that the applicant, establish their claims on the balance of probabilities. The balance of probabilities means more likely than un-likely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally 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 1 , 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.” Rent arrears
The tenancy ended on 10/12/24. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy was $2,718.57 and the amount claimed is ordered in full.

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

1 Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02

At the end of the tenancy the tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and remove all rubbish. 2
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
The amounts ordered are proved with entry and exit inspection reports and photographs, oral evidence, and an invoice. The amount ordered is $920.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

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. 3
Fair wear and tear has been defined as the deterioration of premises due to both reasonable use and ordinary operation of natural forces, reasonable conduct on the part of the tenant being assumed. The amount of damage is not relevant. 4
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). 5 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). 6 Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. 7
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. 8 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. 9
I must take into account 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 2 See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. 3 See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA. 4 See Accessible Properties New Zealand Ltd v McKeefry [2019] NZTT 4114629, 4169403. 5 See section 49B(3)(a) RTA. 6 See section 49B(3)(b) RTA. 7 See section 49B(3A)(a) RTA. 8 See section 49B(1) RTA. 9 See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541. depreciation, I must take into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Carpet and floor damage
The carpet in two rooms and the wooden floor was stained with red dye during the tenancy.
The landlord provided an invoice to confirm the cost to replace the carpet was $2,300.64. A quote for $2,190.75 was provided to repair the wooden floor and the landlord confirmed the repair had been undertaken. The landlord incurred two insurance excesses of $500 in respect of the carpet and wooden floor.
I make an order for the insurance excess of $500, in respect of the wooden floors as this claim relates to removal of the stain. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord did not know the age of the carpet and the entry photographs show it had stains and was worn at the commencement of the tenancy. Accordingly, having regards to betterment and depreciation, I dismiss the claim in relation to the carpet. Shower blockage
The shower was blocked with a bottle lid during the tenancy. The amount claimed of $175.54 is ordered. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. Heat pump
During the tenancy the tenant’s informed the landlord that the heat pump, that had previously worked during the tenancy, was no longer working. The landlord arranged for an electrician to attend at the premises. The electrician discovered that power to the heat pump had been switched off and there was no other issue with the heat pump. The landlord claims the electricians fee of $125.35 and I make an order accordingly. Bond
The bond is to be paid to the landlord immediately to offset the amounts ordered. Filing fee
As the landlord has wholly succeeded with the claim, I have reimbursed the filing fee. Suppression
The landlord sought suppression and as the application is successful, I have made an order accordingly.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5140869 — net $1,906.46 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 10/12/24	$2,718.57	Rent arrears to 10/12/24
Cleaning: and rubbish removal	$920.00	Cleaning: and rubbish removal
Repairs: - wooden floor	$500.00	Repairs: - wooden floor
Repairs: - plumbing fee	$175.54	Repairs: - plumbing fee
Electrician fee - Heatpump	$125.35	Electrician fee - Heatpump
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,906.46
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,906.46

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
Daisy Anne Heremaia and Cajun Kelly Klescovich-Pairama must pay [The landlord/s] $1,906.46 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The balance of the claims are dismissed.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing by video call.
The tenants did not connect to the remote hearing and were telephoned on the phone numbers provided but the phone calls went unanswered. I am satisfied the tenants were properly served with notice of the hearing. The hearing proceeded in their absence.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, payment of the bond and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Relevant legal considerations
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 and expectations. That includes a requirement that the applicant, establish their claims on the balance of probabilities. The balance of probabilities means more likely than un-likely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally 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 1 , 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.” Rent arrears
The tenancy ended on 10/12/24. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy was $2,718.57 and the amount claimed is ordered in full.

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

1 Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02

At the end of the tenancy the tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and remove all rubbish. 2
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
The amounts ordered are proved with entry and exit inspection reports and photographs, oral evidence, and an invoice. The amount ordered is $920.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

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. 3
Fair wear and tear has been defined as the deterioration of premises due to both reasonable use and ordinary operation of natural forces, reasonable conduct on the part of the tenant being assumed. The amount of damage is not relevant. 4
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). 5 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). 6 Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. 7
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. 8 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. 9
I must take into account 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 2 See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. 3 See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA. 4 See Accessible Properties New Zealand Ltd v McKeefry [2019] NZTT 4114629, 4169403. 5 See section 49B(3)(a) RTA. 6 See section 49B(3)(b) RTA. 7 See section 49B(3A)(a) RTA. 8 See section 49B(1) RTA. 9 See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541. depreciation, I must take into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Carpet and floor damage
The carpet in two rooms and the wooden floor was stained with red dye during the tenancy.
The landlord provided an invoice to confirm the cost to replace the carpet was $2,300.64. A quote for $2,190.75 was provided to repair the wooden floor and the landlord confirmed the repair had been undertaken. The landlord incurred two insurance excesses of $500 in respect of the carpet and wooden floor.
I make an order for the insurance excess of $500, in respect of the wooden floors as this claim relates to removal of the stain. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord did not know the age of the carpet and the entry photographs show it had stains and was worn at the commencement of the tenancy. Accordingly, having regards to betterment and depreciation, I dismiss the claim in relation to the carpet. Shower blockage
The shower was blocked with a bottle lid during the tenancy. The amount claimed of $175.54 is ordered. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. Heat pump
During the tenancy the tenant’s informed the landlord that the heat pump, that had previously worked during the tenancy, was no longer working. The landlord arranged for an electrician to attend at the premises. The electrician discovered that power to the heat pump had been switched off and there was no other issue with the heat pump. The landlord claims the electricians fee of $125.35 and I make an order accordingly. Bond
The bond is to be paid to the landlord immediately to offset the amounts ordered. Filing fee
As the landlord has wholly succeeded with the claim, I have reimbursed the filing fee. Suppression
The landlord sought suppression and as the application is successful, I have made an order accordingly.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5140869 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5140869 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Did the tenant comply with their 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

Order

Reasons

Did the tenant comply with their 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