What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5155911?

The tribunal order states: Lane Michael Bristow, Joseph Piripi Rutene, Sam Allen and Samuel Holmes to

How much money was awarded in case 5155911?

Rent Arrears: $1,135.71 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $131.74 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5155911?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5155911?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11630885-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5155911?

The tribunal order states: Lane Michael Bristow, Joseph Piripi Rutene, Sam Allen and Samuel Holmes to

How much money was awarded in case 5155911?

Rent Arrears: $1,135.71 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $131.74 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5155911?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5155911?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11630885-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

90C Michaels Avenue, Ellerslie, Auckland 1051 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5155911 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5155911 — net $1,267.45 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$1,135.71	Rent arrears
Water rates	$131.74	Water rates
Net award	$1,267.45
Bond	$5,000.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,267.45

Order

Lane Michael Bristow, Joseph Piripi Rutene, Sam Allen and Samuel Holmes to pay Pro Management (Auckland) Limited - As Agent For Qing Liu $1,267.45 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $5,000.00 (6437835-008) immediately apportioned as follows: Pro Management (Auckland) Limited - As Agent For Qing Liu: $1,267.45 Lane Michael Bristow, Joseph Piripi Rutene, Sam Allen and Samuel Holmes: $3,732.55

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing via teleconference.
The tenants have applied for the return of their bond and reimbursement of the filing fee.
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 and water arrears?

The tenancy ended on 18 December 2024. The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy. Having sighted the landlord’s evidence in support of these two claims I am satisfied that the tenants are responsible for this debt. The tenants also confirmed during the hearing that they accept these claims.
The claim for rent and water arrears are proven.

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 is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs. Cleaning claim:
The landlord claims that the tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean.
The landlord says that he took exit photographs on 13 December 2024, approximately 5 days prior to the end of the tenancy. The landlord further says that one of the tenants stated that they had already vacated on 13 December 2024. The landlord asked if he could do a final inspection on that date because he was going away. He stated that one of the tenants allowed him to do this.
The landlord confirmed during the hearing that no one from his office undertook a final inspection at the conclusion of the tenancy.
The tenants say that the landlord did not ask for permission to undertake an early exit inspection. The tenants also stated that they were not expecting the landlord to attend early. The tenants say they undertook further cleaning on 17 December 2024.
Notwithstanding the landlord’s explanation the tenants were legally responsible for the premises up to and including 18 December 2024. The onus was on the landlord to undertake a further and final exit inspection shortly thereafter. I would also expect the landlord to provide evidential photographs dated 19 December 2024 or shortly thereafter confirming the state of the premises. He has not done this.
The landlord has failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy.
Accordingly, the landlord’s claim for cleaning must be dismissed.

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.
Where the damage is careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.
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.
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) 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. Wall damage:
The landlord also claims that there was damage to walls within the house. Photographs provided by the landlord show minor scratches and scuff marks. The landlord has not provided an expense claim in support of this. At the very least I would have expected a paid invoice or receipt in support of the amount claimed.
This claim is also dismissed. The landlord must show actual loss in respect of any claim and has not done so. I also find that the evidence provided shows nothing more than general fair, wear, and tear. The minor marks on the walls are consistent with a tenancy which began in December 2021.
The claim for compensation for damage to walls is also dismissed.
Because both parties have had a degree of success with their application I do not order reimbursement of the filing fees for each application.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5155911 — net $1,267.45 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$1,135.71	Rent arrears
Water rates	$131.74	Water rates
Net award	$1,267.45
Bond	$5,000.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,267.45

Order

Lane Michael Bristow, Joseph Piripi Rutene, Sam Allen and Samuel Holmes to pay Pro Management (Auckland) Limited - As Agent For Qing Liu $1,267.45 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $5,000.00 (6437835-008) immediately apportioned as follows: Pro Management (Auckland) Limited - As Agent For Qing Liu: $1,267.45 Lane Michael Bristow, Joseph Piripi Rutene, Sam Allen and Samuel Holmes: $3,732.55

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing via teleconference.
The tenants have applied for the return of their bond and reimbursement of the filing fee.
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 and water arrears?

The tenancy ended on 18 December 2024. The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy. Having sighted the landlord’s evidence in support of these two claims I am satisfied that the tenants are responsible for this debt. The tenants also confirmed during the hearing that they accept these claims.
The claim for rent and water arrears are proven.

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 is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs. Cleaning claim:
The landlord claims that the tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean.
The landlord says that he took exit photographs on 13 December 2024, approximately 5 days prior to the end of the tenancy. The landlord further says that one of the tenants stated that they had already vacated on 13 December 2024. The landlord asked if he could do a final inspection on that date because he was going away. He stated that one of the tenants allowed him to do this.
The landlord confirmed during the hearing that no one from his office undertook a final inspection at the conclusion of the tenancy.
The tenants say that the landlord did not ask for permission to undertake an early exit inspection. The tenants also stated that they were not expecting the landlord to attend early. The tenants say they undertook further cleaning on 17 December 2024.
Notwithstanding the landlord’s explanation the tenants were legally responsible for the premises up to and including 18 December 2024. The onus was on the landlord to undertake a further and final exit inspection shortly thereafter. I would also expect the landlord to provide evidential photographs dated 19 December 2024 or shortly thereafter confirming the state of the premises. He has not done this.
The landlord has failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy.
Accordingly, the landlord’s claim for cleaning must be dismissed.

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.
Where the damage is careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.
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.
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) 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. Wall damage:
The landlord also claims that there was damage to walls within the house. Photographs provided by the landlord show minor scratches and scuff marks. The landlord has not provided an expense claim in support of this. At the very least I would have expected a paid invoice or receipt in support of the amount claimed.
This claim is also dismissed. The landlord must show actual loss in respect of any claim and has not done so. I also find that the evidence provided shows nothing more than general fair, wear, and tear. The minor marks on the walls are consistent with a tenancy which began in December 2021.
The claim for compensation for damage to walls is also dismissed.
Because both parties have had a degree of success with their application I do not order reimbursement of the filing fees for each application.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5155911 — Rent arrears at 90C Michaels Avenue, Ellerslie, Auckland 1051

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5155911 — Rent arrears at 90C Michaels Avenue, Ellerslie, Auckland 1051

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent and water arrears?

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent and water arrears?

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions