How much money was awarded in case 5191031?

Cleaning: $181.13 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $22.19 awarded to landlord; Carpet Installation: $1,442.68 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $167.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5191031?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5191031?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11874774-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5191031?

Cleaning: $181.13 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $22.19 awarded to landlord; Carpet Installation: $1,442.68 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $167.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5191031?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5191031?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11874774-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5191031 — Cleanliness

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5191031 about?

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

Tenantcheck Insights

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5191031. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Carpet installation	$1,442.68		Carpet installation
Paint touch up to damaged wall	$167.00		Paint touch up to damaged wall
Carpet cleaning	$181.13		Carpet cleaning
Products for carpet cleaning	$22.19		Products for carpet cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00		Filing fee reimbursement
Bond		$1,840.00

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name, [Tenant 2]’s name and identifying details.

[Tenant 2] is removed as a party to the claim.

Shiloh Rainbow Day and [Tenant 2] must pay [The landlord/s] $0.00 immediately from the bond, calculated as shown in the table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,840.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

A hearing was held today by teleconference. The landlord attended. There were two tenants named in the original application, Ms Day and [Tenant 2]. Attempts were made to contact Tenant 1, but these were unsuccessful. Tenant 2 was contacted and expressed her understanding that she had been removed from the tenancy. After discussion, the landlord agreed to withdraw the claim against [Tenant 2], and the Tribunal accepted that she be removed as a party. I was satisfied that adequate service of the hearing notice had been completed, and I considered it reasonable to proceed with the hearing in the absence of Ms Day.

Did the tenant comply with their obligations?

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.

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 has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. The landlord’s claims relate to damage and cleaning required at the end of the tenancy. This includes $3,548.91 for the replacement of carpet due to a strong smell of cat urine, $167.00 for paint touch-ups to address wall damage in the entry hall, and $181.13 for end-of-tenancy cleaning.

The landlord relied on the final outgoing inspection report, photographs, and supporting invoices. The landlord explained that at the conclusion of the tenancy, a strong odour of cat urine was detected in the carpet. This odour had not been present during prior inspections. The landlord stated that the presence of a cat had not been disclosed, and the body corporate for the premises prohibits pets. Due to this breach, the landlord’s insurance provider declined cover for the carpet damage. The full cost of replacing the carpet was $3,548.91. However, recognising the application of depreciation, the landlord elected to pursue only the installation portion of the replacement cost, which amounted to $1,442.68. The landlord also sought reimbursement for cleaning products totalling $22.19.

Based on the evidence provided, I am satisfied that the presence of a cat at the premises, contrary to the body corporate rules and without disclosure to the landlord, caused damage to the carpet. The evidence supports the landlord’s assertion of strong cat urination odour, and the supporting documentation confirms the need for carpet replacement. I accept that the odour significantly reduced the amenity of the premises, and that replacement was required. I am satisfied that the landlord’s decision to claim only the cost of installation is reasonable and appropriate. The costs for cleaning, including carpet cleaning, are also established on the evidence, and a further $22.19 is allowed for cleaning products used.

I am further satisfied that the photographs clearly show damage to the walls in the entry hallway which required paint touch-up, and that the tenant is liable for this damage under section 40(2)(a).

As the landlord has been wholly successful with the claim, I order the tenant reimburse the filing fee and grant suppression of the landlord’s name and [Tenant 2]’s name.

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5191031. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Carpet installation	$1,442.68		Carpet installation
Paint touch up to damaged wall	$167.00		Paint touch up to damaged wall
Carpet cleaning	$181.13		Carpet cleaning
Products for carpet cleaning	$22.19		Products for carpet cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00		Filing fee reimbursement
Bond		$1,840.00

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name, [Tenant 2]’s name and identifying details.

[Tenant 2] is removed as a party to the claim.

Shiloh Rainbow Day and [Tenant 2] must pay [The landlord/s] $0.00 immediately from the bond, calculated as shown in the table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,840.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

Did the tenant comply with their obligations?

I am further satisfied that the photographs clearly show damage to the walls in the entry hallway which required paint touch-up, and that the tenant is liable for this damage under section 40(2)(a).

As the landlord has been wholly successful with the claim, I order the tenant reimburse the filing fee and grant suppression of the landlord’s name and [Tenant 2]’s name.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5191031 — Cleanliness

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5191031 — Cleanliness

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Did the tenant comply with their obligations?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Did the tenant comply with their obligations?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions