How much money was awarded in case 5146612?

Cleaning: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $178.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $4,728.57 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5146612?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5146612?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11543509-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5146612?

Cleaning: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $178.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $4,728.57 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5146612?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5146612?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11543509-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5146612 — Rent arrears

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5146612 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5146612 — net $506.57 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 20 December 2024	$4,728.57	Rent arrears to 20 December 2024
Carpet Cleaning	$500.00	9. The amount claimed for cleaning all the linen is reasonable and is proven as ordered above.
Cleaning	$1,000.00	9. The amount claimed for cleaning all the linen is reasonable and is proven as ordered above.
Cleaning: linen	$178.00	9. The amount claimed for cleaning all the linen is reasonable and is proven as ordered above.
Repairs	$500.00	Repairs
Net award	$506.57
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$506.57

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name and identifying details.

Rebecca Furner and Dylan McIntosh must pay [The landlord/s] $506.57 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $6,400.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

Prior to the hearing, Ms Furner had applied for an adjournment on medical grounds, however Mr McIntosh appeared and advised the tribunal that he was able to speak on her behalf. The pair have at one time been a couple, but they had broken up and have now reunited.

The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 20 December 2024. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy as ordered above.

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

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) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy. The photos show the premises in need of a clean and I am satisfied that cleaning was required. I am not prepared to allow the full amount claimed of $1710.63, because I consider the tenant’s obligations are only to leave the premises reasonable clean and tidy and not to the standard of a full exit clean. I will allow $1000.

I accept that the tenant’s kept dogs at the premises. The tenant says there were two Kelpie dogs and one pug and they were all caged, all the time. The landlord said there were dog hairs everywhere. Kelpie dogs shed hair.

I consider it more probable than not that there were dog hairs that needed additional cleaning and that the dog hairs and odours came from the tenant’s dogs. I do not allow the full amount of $701.50 that was claimed. I will only allow $500.

The amount claimed for cleaning all the linen is reasonable and is proven as ordered above.

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. See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B 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.

I am satisfied that a smoke door was damaged at the property. Even though this appears to have been caused by the Police attempting to break through and locate Mr McIntosh, this is damage for which the tenant’s are liable.

The amount ordered is proved and represents the landlord’s excess.

I am not prepared to allow the amount sought for the dented door because that sum has not yet been incurred.

Because [The landlord/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. As the landlord has been successful it is appropriate that they be granted name suppression.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5146612 — net $506.57 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 20 December 2024	$4,728.57	Rent arrears to 20 December 2024
Carpet Cleaning	$500.00	9. The amount claimed for cleaning all the linen is reasonable and is proven as ordered above.
Cleaning	$1,000.00	9. The amount claimed for cleaning all the linen is reasonable and is proven as ordered above.
Cleaning: linen	$178.00	9. The amount claimed for cleaning all the linen is reasonable and is proven as ordered above.
Repairs	$500.00	Repairs
Net award	$506.57
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$506.57

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name and identifying details.
Rebecca Furner and Dylan McIntosh must pay [The landlord/s] $506.57 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $6,400.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
Prior to the hearing, Ms Furner had applied for an adjournment on medical grounds, however Mr McIntosh appeared and advised the tribunal that he was able to speak on her behalf. The pair have at one time been a couple, but they had broken up and have now reunited.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 20 December 2024. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy as ordered above.

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

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) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy. The photos show the premises in need of a clean and I am satisfied that cleaning was required. I am not prepared to allow the full amount claimed of $1710.63, because I consider the tenant’s obligations are only to leave the premises reasonable clean and tidy and not to the standard of a full exit clean. I will allow $1000.
I accept that the tenant’s kept dogs at the premises. The tenant says there were two Kelpie dogs and one pug and they were all caged, all the time. The landlord said there were dog hairs everywhere. Kelpie dogs shed hair.
I consider it more probable than not that there were dog hairs that needed additional cleaning and that the dog hairs and odours came from the tenant’s dogs. I do not allow the full amount of $701.50 that was claimed. I will only allow $500.
The amount claimed for cleaning all the linen is reasonable and is proven as ordered above.

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. See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B 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.
I am satisfied that a smoke door was damaged at the property. Even though this appears to have been caused by the Police attempting to break through and locate Mr McIntosh, this is damage for which the tenant’s are liable.
The amount ordered is proved and represents the landlord’s excess.
I am not prepared to allow the amount sought for the dented door because that sum has not yet been incurred.
Because [The landlord/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. As the landlord has been successful it is appropriate that they be granted name suppression.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5146612 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5146612 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

How much is owed for rent?

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