How much money was awarded in case 5196192?

Rent Arrears: $2,796.25 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5196192?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5196192?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11663189-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5196192?

Rent Arrears: $2,796.25 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5196192?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5196192?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11663189-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit/Flat Unit 2, 36 Pah Road, Papatoetoe, Auckland 2025 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5196192 — Rent arrears

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5196192 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 5196192. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
rs suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details. 2. The application for rent arrears and compensation totallin	$2,796.25		rs suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details. 2. The application for rent arrears and compensation totallin

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

The application for rent arrears and compensation totalling $2,796.25 is dismissed.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,250.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The tenant/s] immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing, by telephone.

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 was for a fixed term from 20/11/2023 to 19/11/2025 at $750.00 rent per week.

By agreement the tenancy ended early on 16/2/2025, after the tenant gave 28 days notice.

The landlord sought a further 21 days rent because the premises were only being re-let on 6/4/2025.

The application for further rent at the end of the 28 day notice fails.

The evidence from both parties was that an agreement was reached for the tenant to leave after giving the required notice.

It is not open for the landlord to unilaterally change the agreement and seek further rent.

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 sought compensation of $546.25 for unblocking of a toilet in January 2024.

In support of the claim the landlord provided an invoice and photograph.

On the other hand, the tenant disputed they blocked the toilet and suggested that the previous property manager had confirmed the blockage was not their fault.

The landlord confirmed that was her understanding of what the previous property manager ad advised but the owner still wished to seek compensation.

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.

The landlord is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.

I find the landlord has not satisfied me that it is more likely than not that the tenant was responsible for the toilet blockage.

The explanation in the invoice is unreadable and the photograph unclear. No other photographic or video evidence was provided.

As both claims against the tenant have failed, I have ordered the bond be refunded to them.

Suppression pursuant to section 95A is granted to the tenant because they were successful in the proceedings.

No suppression is available to the landlord because they were unsuccessful with the claims.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5196192. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
rs suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details. 2. The application for rent arrears and compensation totallin	$2,796.25		rs suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details. 2. The application for rent arrears and compensation totallin

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.
The application for rent arrears and compensation totalling $2,796.25 is dismissed.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,250.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The tenant/s] immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing, by telephone.
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 was for a fixed term from 20/11/2023 to 19/11/2025 at $750.00 rent per week.
By agreement the tenancy ended early on 16/2/2025, after the tenant gave 28 days notice.
The landlord sought a further 21 days rent because the premises were only being re-let on 6/4/2025.
The application for further rent at the end of the 28 day notice fails.
The evidence from both parties was that an agreement was reached for the tenant to leave after giving the required notice.
It is not open for the landlord to unilaterally change the agreement and seek further rent.

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 sought compensation of $546.25 for unblocking of a toilet in January 2024.
In support of the claim the landlord provided an invoice and photograph.
On the other hand, the tenant disputed they blocked the toilet and suggested that the previous property manager had confirmed the blockage was not their fault.
The landlord confirmed that was her understanding of what the previous property manager ad advised but the owner still wished to seek compensation.
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.
The landlord is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.
I find the landlord has not satisfied me that it is more likely than not that the tenant was responsible for the toilet blockage.
The explanation in the invoice is unreadable and the photograph unclear. No other photographic or video evidence was provided.
As both claims against the tenant have failed, I have ordered the bond be refunded to them.
Suppression pursuant to section 95A is granted to the tenant because they were successful in the proceedings.
No suppression is available to the landlord because they were unsuccessful with the claims.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5196192 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat Unit 2, 36 Pah Road, Papatoetoe, Auckland 2025

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5196192 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat Unit 2, 36 Pah Road, Papatoetoe, Auckland 2025

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions