What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5208193 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenant’s application for suppression is refused.

How much money was awarded in case 5208193?

Cleaning: $150.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,000.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $2,000.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $700.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $10,600.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $197.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5208193?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5208193?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12544673-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5208193 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenant’s application for suppression is refused.

How much money was awarded in case 5208193?

Cleaning: $150.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,000.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $2,000.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $700.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $10,600.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $197.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5208193?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5208193?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12544673-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

8 McLean Street, Linwood, Christchurch 8062 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5208193 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5208193 — net $12,247.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears to 22 May 2025	$10,600.00		Rent arrears to 22 May 2025
Lock/key replacement	$100.00		Lock/key replacement
Carpet damage	$2,000.00		Carpet damage
Wall repairs and painting	$1,000.00		Wall repairs and painting
Tile damage	$700.00		Tile damage
Rubbish removal	$197.00		Rubbish removal
Cleaning and outside work	$500.00		Cleaning and outside work
Carpet Cleaning	$150.00		Carpet Cleaning
Exemplary damages		$1,000.00	Exemplary damages
Total award	$15,247.00	$1,000.00
Net award	$12,247.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$12,247.00

Order

The tenant’s application for suppression is refused.
[The tenant/s] must pay [The landlord/s] $12,247.00 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
The parties’ claims are otherwise dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The landlord attended in person. The tenant attended by telephone.
The landlord seeks rent arrears and compensation following the end of the tenancy.
The tenant seeks compensation and exemplary damages for breach of the landlord’s obligations relating to the condition of the premises. Landlord’s Claims The Tenant’s Relevant 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.
The tenant must not carelessly or intentionally damage 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.
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).
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).
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.
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.
The Tribunal must apply betterment and depreciation where appropriate. 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 Tribunal considers the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Rent
The Tribunal has previously determined the amount of rent arrears and the landlord confirmed that he claims that amount. I have therefore awarded that amount. Locks
The tenancy agreement states that the landlord supplied the tenant with keys for the front door and the garage. I accept the landlord’s evidence that the tenant did not return those keys. I also accept his evidence that the cost to replace those locks was $100. Carpet
The tenant uplifted and disposed of the carpet in one of the bedrooms. It was water damaged and mouldy. The landlord says that the damage resulted from a leak in the premises that the tenant failed to report. There was damage to a toilet wall as well.
I accept that the damage was the result of the tenant failing to report the leak. It is likely that the leak would have become obvious before there was serious damage to the carpet.
There is also good evidence that the rest of the carpet in the premises was damaged during the tenancy by staining which the landlord could not remove.
The landlord said that the carpet was five years old and in good condition. The inspection report attached to the tenancy agreement gives a somewhat different impression where it refers to slime on the carpet and floor coverings being in “fair” condition.
The video evidence that the landlord produced appears to the show the carpet to be in reasonable condition.
Overall, I find that the carpet was in average condition for its age.
I accept that the carpet will cost approximately $4,000 to replace. Considering the age and condition of the carpet, an award of $2,000 is reasonable. Wall Repair and Painting
The tenant put stickers on walls in places and when they were removed, they pulled paint off the walls. There was also a hole in the wall in one of the bedrooms. There were some dents and nicks here and there, but I regard that as fair wear and tear. There was some wear and tear at the start of the tenancy as well.
Taking everything into consideration, an award of $1,000 for repairs and painting is reasonable. Tiles
Some tiles in the kitchen were broken during the tenancy from the tenant dropping objects on them. The landlord paid for them to be replaced and supplied the tiles from ones he had. An award of $700 is reasonable. Rubbish
The tenant left rubbish at the premises and the landlord had to collect and dump it. There were dump fees in the sum of $197 which I have awarded. Cleaning and Outside Work
The premises were not left reasonably clean and tidy, and the landlord paid for house cleaning and yard tidying as well as helping himself. Including the cost of the contractor an award of $500 is appropriate. Carpet Cleaning
The landlord attempted to clean the carpet at a cost of $150 for hire and chemicals which I have awarded. Heat Pump
There was a period at the end of the tenancy when the landlord and the tenant were communicating about when the tenant could return possession of the premises to the landlord and when she was going to comply with her end-of- tenancy obligations. The tenant said that the landlord did not make his requirements clear. I don’t accept that. It was the tenant’s responsibility to comply with her obligations and to return the keys to the landlord or agree other arrangements for returning possession.
At one point the tenant was not occupying the premises but she had not returned possession. The premises were left open and obviously insecure. During that time someone enter and removed the heat pump.
I find that the tenant contributed to the loss of the heat pump. If she had secured the premises, or returned possession to the landlord, it is unlikely that it would have been taken.
The cost of replacing the heat pump is approximately $4,000. It was in the premises when the landlord bought them in 2018 and there is evidence that it was quite old. The tenant also produced independent evidence that it was working poorly. In all the circumstances I find that an award of compensation for the loss of the heat pump is not warranted. The Tenant’s Claims Relevant Law
Under section 45 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, a landlord must provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair, comply with all requirements in respect of smoke alarms and insulation set out in the Residential Tenancies (Smoke Alarms and Insulation) Regulations 2016, comply with any relevant enactment in relation to buildings, health and safety and comply with Healthy Homes Standards.
Breaching any of these obligations is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $7,200.00.
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. Claims
The tenant’s claims related to the Healthy Homes Standards.
The tenant produced two reports on the condition of the premises. They were not Healthy Homes Reports as such, but they contained some relevant material.
The landlord produced a Heathy Homes Report completed after the tenancy ended. That report found that the premises were compliant except for ceiling insulation which was insufficient and heating because there was no heat pump. The landlord argued that the type of insulation in the ceiling made up for the shortfall but there was no evidence to support that.
The evidence that the premises were deficient in other respects was not enough to prove any breach of the Standards. There was support for the tenant’s assertion that there were draughts in the premises, but the photographic evidence did not clearly support that. There was also evidence that the tenant had interfered with the premises to create draughts.
The insulation breach was for the entire term of the tenancy. It should have complied from the start. An award of exemplary damages is required. The landlord should have checked the insulation and ensured that it complied. An award of $1,000 is appropriate. Bond
The landlord lodged the bond slightly late. I accept his explanation that he was suffering from Covid at the time. No award of exemplary damages is required. Suppression
The tenant has not been substantially successful and there are no compelling reasons to grant her request for name suppression. Her request is therefore refused.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5208193 — net $12,247.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears to 22 May 2025	$10,600.00		Rent arrears to 22 May 2025
Lock/key replacement	$100.00		Lock/key replacement
Carpet damage	$2,000.00		Carpet damage
Wall repairs and painting	$1,000.00		Wall repairs and painting
Tile damage	$700.00		Tile damage
Rubbish removal	$197.00		Rubbish removal
Cleaning and outside work	$500.00		Cleaning and outside work
Carpet Cleaning	$150.00		Carpet Cleaning
Exemplary damages		$1,000.00	Exemplary damages
Total award	$15,247.00	$1,000.00
Net award	$12,247.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$12,247.00

Order

The tenant’s application for suppression is refused.
[The tenant/s] must pay [The landlord/s] $12,247.00 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
The parties’ claims are otherwise dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The landlord attended in person. The tenant attended by telephone.
The landlord seeks rent arrears and compensation following the end of the tenancy.
The tenant seeks compensation and exemplary damages for breach of the landlord’s obligations relating to the condition of the premises. Landlord’s Claims The Tenant’s Relevant 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.
The tenant must not carelessly or intentionally damage 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.
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).
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).
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.
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.
The Tribunal must apply betterment and depreciation where appropriate. 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 Tribunal considers the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Rent
The Tribunal has previously determined the amount of rent arrears and the landlord confirmed that he claims that amount. I have therefore awarded that amount. Locks
The tenancy agreement states that the landlord supplied the tenant with keys for the front door and the garage. I accept the landlord’s evidence that the tenant did not return those keys. I also accept his evidence that the cost to replace those locks was $100. Carpet
The tenant uplifted and disposed of the carpet in one of the bedrooms. It was water damaged and mouldy. The landlord says that the damage resulted from a leak in the premises that the tenant failed to report. There was damage to a toilet wall as well.
I accept that the damage was the result of the tenant failing to report the leak. It is likely that the leak would have become obvious before there was serious damage to the carpet.
There is also good evidence that the rest of the carpet in the premises was damaged during the tenancy by staining which the landlord could not remove.
The landlord said that the carpet was five years old and in good condition. The inspection report attached to the tenancy agreement gives a somewhat different impression where it refers to slime on the carpet and floor coverings being in “fair” condition.
The video evidence that the landlord produced appears to the show the carpet to be in reasonable condition.
Overall, I find that the carpet was in average condition for its age.
I accept that the carpet will cost approximately $4,000 to replace. Considering the age and condition of the carpet, an award of $2,000 is reasonable. Wall Repair and Painting
The tenant put stickers on walls in places and when they were removed, they pulled paint off the walls. There was also a hole in the wall in one of the bedrooms. There were some dents and nicks here and there, but I regard that as fair wear and tear. There was some wear and tear at the start of the tenancy as well.
Taking everything into consideration, an award of $1,000 for repairs and painting is reasonable. Tiles
Some tiles in the kitchen were broken during the tenancy from the tenant dropping objects on them. The landlord paid for them to be replaced and supplied the tiles from ones he had. An award of $700 is reasonable. Rubbish
The tenant left rubbish at the premises and the landlord had to collect and dump it. There were dump fees in the sum of $197 which I have awarded. Cleaning and Outside Work
The premises were not left reasonably clean and tidy, and the landlord paid for house cleaning and yard tidying as well as helping himself. Including the cost of the contractor an award of $500 is appropriate. Carpet Cleaning
The landlord attempted to clean the carpet at a cost of $150 for hire and chemicals which I have awarded. Heat Pump
There was a period at the end of the tenancy when the landlord and the tenant were communicating about when the tenant could return possession of the premises to the landlord and when she was going to comply with her end-of- tenancy obligations. The tenant said that the landlord did not make his requirements clear. I don’t accept that. It was the tenant’s responsibility to comply with her obligations and to return the keys to the landlord or agree other arrangements for returning possession.
At one point the tenant was not occupying the premises but she had not returned possession. The premises were left open and obviously insecure. During that time someone enter and removed the heat pump.
I find that the tenant contributed to the loss of the heat pump. If she had secured the premises, or returned possession to the landlord, it is unlikely that it would have been taken.
The cost of replacing the heat pump is approximately $4,000. It was in the premises when the landlord bought them in 2018 and there is evidence that it was quite old. The tenant also produced independent evidence that it was working poorly. In all the circumstances I find that an award of compensation for the loss of the heat pump is not warranted. The Tenant’s Claims Relevant Law
Under section 45 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, a landlord must provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair, comply with all requirements in respect of smoke alarms and insulation set out in the Residential Tenancies (Smoke Alarms and Insulation) Regulations 2016, comply with any relevant enactment in relation to buildings, health and safety and comply with Healthy Homes Standards.
Breaching any of these obligations is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $7,200.00.
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. Claims
The tenant’s claims related to the Healthy Homes Standards.
The tenant produced two reports on the condition of the premises. They were not Healthy Homes Reports as such, but they contained some relevant material.
The landlord produced a Heathy Homes Report completed after the tenancy ended. That report found that the premises were compliant except for ceiling insulation which was insufficient and heating because there was no heat pump. The landlord argued that the type of insulation in the ceiling made up for the shortfall but there was no evidence to support that.
The evidence that the premises were deficient in other respects was not enough to prove any breach of the Standards. There was support for the tenant’s assertion that there were draughts in the premises, but the photographic evidence did not clearly support that. There was also evidence that the tenant had interfered with the premises to create draughts.
The insulation breach was for the entire term of the tenancy. It should have complied from the start. An award of exemplary damages is required. The landlord should have checked the insulation and ensured that it complied. An award of $1,000 is appropriate. Bond
The landlord lodged the bond slightly late. I accept his explanation that he was suffering from Covid at the time. No award of exemplary damages is required. Suppression
The tenant has not been substantially successful and there are no compelling reasons to grant her request for name suppression. Her request is therefore refused.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5208193 — Rent arrears at 8 McLean Street, Linwood, Christchurch 8062

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5208193 — Rent arrears at 8 McLean Street, Linwood, Christchurch 8062

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions