What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5155133?

The tribunal order states: Destiny Newton and Lincoln Charles Logan Hunter must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes

How much money was awarded in case 5155133?

Cleaning: $780.74 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $415.71 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $280.02 awarded to landlord; Rent Credit: $63.00 awarded to tenant; Rubbish Removal: $1,641.20 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5155133?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5155133?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11727366-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5155133?

The tribunal order states: Destiny Newton and Lincoln Charles Logan Hunter must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes

How much money was awarded in case 5155133?

Cleaning: $780.74 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $415.71 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $280.02 awarded to landlord; Rent Credit: $63.00 awarded to tenant; Rubbish Removal: $1,641.20 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5155133?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5155133?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11727366-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

5B Skipper Avenue, Mount Roskill, Auckland 1041 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5155133 — Cleanliness

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5155133 — net $3,054.67 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Cleaning	$780.74		Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$1,641.20		Rubbish removal
Repairs to walls	$415.71		Repairs to walls
Repairs to wardrobes	$280.02		Repairs to wardrobes
Rent credit		$63.00	Rent credit
Total award	$3,117.67	$63.00
Net award	$3,054.67
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,054.67

Order

Destiny Newton and Lincoln Charles Logan Hunter must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities $3,054.67 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.

Reasons

Only the landlord, represented by Mr Temu and Ms Taliauli, attended the hearing. There was no appearance by the tenants nor any advice to the Tribunal of any reason why they could not attend. As the tenants have been notified, the hearing proceeded.
This tenancy began on 17 February 2020 and ended on 19 December 2024.
The landlord has applied for compensation following the end of the tenancy. The landlord advises that there is no bond. There is also a rent credit, which has been noted above.

Did the tenants 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) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the RTA).
The evidence shows that the tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. The landlord provided photographs and detailed inspection reports showing the condition of the premises at the start and end of the tenancy. The photographs show that the interior of the house required cleaning.
At the end of the tenancy there were large items, including mattresses, furniture, an outdoor metal swing set, household goods, plywood, and other rubbish left at the premises, which the landlord had to arrange for removal and disposal. A maintenance work order was provided detailing the work undertaken. This shows that 10 cubic metres of rubbish was removed. The landlord has explained that the charges include labour and travel, with a truck being used to remove the rubbish.
I find the landlord has established its claim for cleaning and rubbish removal costs, which are ordered above. General principles regarding responsibility for damage
The landlord seeks compensation for tenant damage. Where compensation for damage is being claimed, 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 of the RTA.
Where the damage is careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. 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) of the RTA.
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). See section 49B(3)(b) RTA. Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. See section 49B(3A)(a) of the RTA.
In this case, the landlord advises that it is not insured for tenant damage.
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) of the 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.
When determining the quantum of compensation, betterment and depreciation must be taken into account. Applying the principle 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, the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan must be considered. The landlord’s claim for compensation for tenant damage
On the basis of the landlord’s evidence, I am satisfied that the following damage was caused during the tenancy: • Wall damage: there was damage to walls in the living room, bedroom 1 and bedroom 2. • Wardrobe repairs: rails and shelving in the wardrobes in two of the bedrooms (bedrooms 2 and 3) were missing. These had to be reinstated.
The above damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
A detailed invoice for the remedial work has been produced. The amounts ordered are proved.
In relation to any part of the damage that is due to careless damage, the amount awarded is less than the cap under section 49B (four weeks’ market rent). The landlord advises that the current market rent for the premises is $646.00 per week. Filing fee and name suppression
While successful, the landlord does not seek the filing fee.
The landlord requests name suppression for the tenants. Having had regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, and noting the landlord’s reasons, the Tribunal declines this request. The tenants have been unsuccessful, and the landlord has not provided any persuasive reasons for name suppression in this case.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5155133 — net $3,054.67 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Cleaning	$780.74		Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$1,641.20		Rubbish removal
Repairs to walls	$415.71		Repairs to walls
Repairs to wardrobes	$280.02		Repairs to wardrobes
Rent credit		$63.00	Rent credit
Total award	$3,117.67	$63.00
Net award	$3,054.67
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,054.67

Order

Destiny Newton and Lincoln Charles Logan Hunter must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities $3,054.67 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.

Reasons

Only the landlord, represented by Mr Temu and Ms Taliauli, attended the hearing. There was no appearance by the tenants nor any advice to the Tribunal of any reason why they could not attend. As the tenants have been notified, the hearing proceeded.
This tenancy began on 17 February 2020 and ended on 19 December 2024.
The landlord has applied for compensation following the end of the tenancy. The landlord advises that there is no bond. There is also a rent credit, which has been noted above.

Did the tenants 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) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the RTA).
The evidence shows that the tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. The landlord provided photographs and detailed inspection reports showing the condition of the premises at the start and end of the tenancy. The photographs show that the interior of the house required cleaning.
At the end of the tenancy there were large items, including mattresses, furniture, an outdoor metal swing set, household goods, plywood, and other rubbish left at the premises, which the landlord had to arrange for removal and disposal. A maintenance work order was provided detailing the work undertaken. This shows that 10 cubic metres of rubbish was removed. The landlord has explained that the charges include labour and travel, with a truck being used to remove the rubbish.
I find the landlord has established its claim for cleaning and rubbish removal costs, which are ordered above. General principles regarding responsibility for damage
The landlord seeks compensation for tenant damage. Where compensation for damage is being claimed, 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 of the RTA.
Where the damage is careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. 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) of the RTA.
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). See section 49B(3)(b) RTA. Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. See section 49B(3A)(a) of the RTA.
In this case, the landlord advises that it is not insured for tenant damage.
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) of the 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.
When determining the quantum of compensation, betterment and depreciation must be taken into account. Applying the principle 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, the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan must be considered. The landlord’s claim for compensation for tenant damage
On the basis of the landlord’s evidence, I am satisfied that the following damage was caused during the tenancy: • Wall damage: there was damage to walls in the living room, bedroom 1 and bedroom 2. • Wardrobe repairs: rails and shelving in the wardrobes in two of the bedrooms (bedrooms 2 and 3) were missing. These had to be reinstated.
The above damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
A detailed invoice for the remedial work has been produced. The amounts ordered are proved.
In relation to any part of the damage that is due to careless damage, the amount awarded is less than the cap under section 49B (four weeks’ market rent). The landlord advises that the current market rent for the premises is $646.00 per week. Filing fee and name suppression
While successful, the landlord does not seek the filing fee.
The landlord requests name suppression for the tenants. Having had regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, and noting the landlord’s reasons, the Tribunal declines this request. The tenants have been unsuccessful, and the landlord has not provided any persuasive reasons for name suppression in this case.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5155133 — Cleanliness at 5B Skipper Avenue, Mount Roskill, Auckland 1041

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5155133 — Cleanliness at 5B Skipper Avenue, Mount Roskill, Auckland 1041

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions