What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5158939 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 5158939?

Individual award amounts are in the official MoJ PDF. Claim amounts appear on this page when claims and net totals reconcile.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5158939?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5158939?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11775586-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5158939 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 5158939?

Individual award amounts are in the official MoJ PDF. Claim amounts appear on this page when claims and net totals reconcile.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5158939?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5158939?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11775586-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit/Flat 1, 524 Armagh Street, Linwood, Christchurch 8011 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5158939 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

Unit/Flat 1, 524 Armagh Street, Linwood, Christchurch 8011 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5158939 — Rent arrears | TenantCheck

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name.
Zoe Anne Paula Tia must pay [The landlord/s] $2,525.72 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the video hearing. The tenant did not attend. A call to the tenant’s last known mobile number went to voicemail.
Following the fixed term tenancy coming to an early end, the landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee. The tenancy
A fixed term tenancy commenced on 8 May 2024 for a 12-month term ending 4 May 2025.
In November 2024, the tenant requested an early end to the tenancy.
The landlord agreed to the fixed-term tenancy coming to an early end on the condition the tenant paid the landlord one week’s rent as a break fee (and to cover the cost of finding a new tenant) and paid rent until a new tenancy commenced.
The tenant moved out on 17 January 2025.
A new tenancy commenced on 18 January 2025. Burden and standard of proof
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.
That includes a requirement that the party bringing the claim (the applicant), establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. The balance of probabilities means more likely than unlikely, or in mathematical terms, has a fraction 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 (DC) TT233/02, 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.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenant moved out on 17 January 2025. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing to that date was $2,718.57.
The landlord has received the bond of $2,040.00 and has applied the bond to the rent arrears.
The unpaid rent arrears is therefore $678.57.

Did the tenant agree to pay a break fee?

The landlord seeks an order for one week’s rent as a break fee, specifically, to cover the cost of the landlord finding a new tenant before the end of the tenancy.
The landlord has produced text messages exchanged with the tenant on or about 29 November 2024 in which the tenant agreed to pay one week’s rent as a fee for ending the fixed-term tenancy early.
I award the landlord $510.00, being one week’s rent, as a break-fee for ending the fixed-term tenancy early.

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.
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish.
The landlord produced photographs taken on 17 January 2025 which show rubbish, furniture and food were left at the property.
The landlord produced three invoices which he issued as a record of his labour costs for removing the rubbish and cleaning the property. The three invoices dated 18, 19 and 20 January 2025 total $900.00 for 2.5 days’ work (charged at $30 per hour).
The landlord produced invoices for the cost of dumping the rubbish which totalled $85.15.
The amounts ordered are proved.

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.
The landlord claims the tenant caused damage to the premises, including by scratching or marking three internal doors, which the landlord says required repainting. The landlord said other repairs were required to patch and paint marked walls
The landlord produced a receipt from Bunnings for the cost of materials he purchased to carry out the repairs.
The landlord did not file an entry inspection report, or any photographic evidence to show the condition the property was in at the start of the tenancy.
Without evidence establishing what condition the premises were in at the start of the tenancy, the landlord has not proved the damage was caused during this tenancy.
I dismiss the landlord’s claim for the cost of materials purchased to repair the alleged damage.
The landlord did provide evidence, in the form of text messages, that the tenant agreed to compensate the landlord for the cost of repairing damage caused by a fire in the kitchen in July 2024. The text messages prove the tenant accepts she caused the damage during the tenancy.
In texts messages exchanged with the landlord between 3 – 8 July 2024, the tenant acknowledged they had left a pot on the stove when they left the house, and the wall behind the stove suffered fire damage. The tenant accepted liability for the cost of repairs, being $75 for the cost of an electrician repairing the electrical switch damaged in the fire, and $250 for the cost of materials purchased by the landlord to repair the wall damage.
I award the landlord $325 compensation for the cost of repairing the fire- damaged wall beside the stove. Should the tenant reimburse the landlord’s application fee?
As the landlord has succeeded with the claim the tenant must reimburse the filing fee. Should the landlord’s name be suppressed?
The Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name and/or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case. See s 95A of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
The landlord applied for suppression of their name. As the application was successful, the landlord is entitled to name suppression and I make the order accordingly.

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name.
Zoe Anne Paula Tia must pay [The landlord/s] $2,525.72 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the video hearing. The tenant did not attend. A call to the tenant’s last known mobile number went to voicemail.
Following the fixed term tenancy coming to an early end, the landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee. The tenancy
A fixed term tenancy commenced on 8 May 2024 for a 12-month term ending 4 May 2025.
In November 2024, the tenant requested an early end to the tenancy.
The landlord agreed to the fixed-term tenancy coming to an early end on the condition the tenant paid the landlord one week’s rent as a break fee (and to cover the cost of finding a new tenant) and paid rent until a new tenancy commenced.
The tenant moved out on 17 January 2025.
A new tenancy commenced on 18 January 2025. Burden and standard of proof
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.
That includes a requirement that the party bringing the claim (the applicant), establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. The balance of probabilities means more likely than unlikely, or in mathematical terms, has a fraction 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 (DC) TT233/02, 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.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenant moved out on 17 January 2025. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing to that date was $2,718.57.
The landlord has received the bond of $2,040.00 and has applied the bond to the rent arrears.
The unpaid rent arrears is therefore $678.57.

Did the tenant agree to pay a break fee?

The landlord seeks an order for one week’s rent as a break fee, specifically, to cover the cost of the landlord finding a new tenant before the end of the tenancy.
The landlord has produced text messages exchanged with the tenant on or about 29 November 2024 in which the tenant agreed to pay one week’s rent as a fee for ending the fixed-term tenancy early.
I award the landlord $510.00, being one week’s rent, as a break-fee for ending the fixed-term tenancy early.

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.
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish.
The landlord produced photographs taken on 17 January 2025 which show rubbish, furniture and food were left at the property.
The landlord produced three invoices which he issued as a record of his labour costs for removing the rubbish and cleaning the property. The three invoices dated 18, 19 and 20 January 2025 total $900.00 for 2.5 days’ work (charged at $30 per hour).
The landlord produced invoices for the cost of dumping the rubbish which totalled $85.15.
The amounts ordered are proved.

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.
The landlord claims the tenant caused damage to the premises, including by scratching or marking three internal doors, which the landlord says required repainting. The landlord said other repairs were required to patch and paint marked walls
The landlord produced a receipt from Bunnings for the cost of materials he purchased to carry out the repairs.
The landlord did not file an entry inspection report, or any photographic evidence to show the condition the property was in at the start of the tenancy.
Without evidence establishing what condition the premises were in at the start of the tenancy, the landlord has not proved the damage was caused during this tenancy.
I dismiss the landlord’s claim for the cost of materials purchased to repair the alleged damage.
The landlord did provide evidence, in the form of text messages, that the tenant agreed to compensate the landlord for the cost of repairing damage caused by a fire in the kitchen in July 2024. The text messages prove the tenant accepts she caused the damage during the tenancy.
In texts messages exchanged with the landlord between 3 – 8 July 2024, the tenant acknowledged they had left a pot on the stove when they left the house, and the wall behind the stove suffered fire damage. The tenant accepted liability for the cost of repairs, being $75 for the cost of an electrician repairing the electrical switch damaged in the fire, and $250 for the cost of materials purchased by the landlord to repair the wall damage.
I award the landlord $325 compensation for the cost of repairing the fire- damaged wall beside the stove. Should the tenant reimburse the landlord’s application fee?
As the landlord has succeeded with the claim the tenant must reimburse the filing fee. Should the landlord’s name be suppressed?
The Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name and/or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case. See s 95A of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
The landlord applied for suppression of their name. As the application was successful, the landlord is entitled to name suppression and I make the order accordingly.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5158939 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 1, 524 Armagh Street, Linwood, Christchurch 8011

Tenancy Tribunal case 5158939 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 1, 524 Armagh Street, Linwood, Christchurch 8011

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Did the tenant agree to pay a break fee?

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

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Did the tenant agree to pay a break fee?

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

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?