What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5241456?

The tribunal order states: Casey Dixon must pay Michael John Brisco $1,819.37 immediately, calculated

How much money was awarded in case 5241456?

Cleaning: $300.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $150.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $380.00 awarded to landlord; Gib Stopping: $230.00 awarded to landlord; Painting: $470.00 awarded to landlord; Towel Rail: $99.37 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $190.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5241456?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5241456?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12003840-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5241456?

The tribunal order states: Casey Dixon must pay Michael John Brisco $1,819.37 immediately, calculated

How much money was awarded in case 5241456?

Cleaning: $300.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $150.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $380.00 awarded to landlord; Gib Stopping: $230.00 awarded to landlord; Painting: $470.00 awarded to landlord; Towel Rail: $99.37 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $190.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5241456?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5241456?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12003840-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

93 Argyle Street, Hawera, Hawera 4610 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5241456 — Property damage

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5241456 — net $1,819.37 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning	$150.00	Cleaning
Carpet Cleaning	$300.00	Carpet Cleaning
Repairs: Painting	$470.00	Repairs: Painting
Repairs: Gib stopping	$230.00	Repairs: Gib stopping
Lock/key replacement	$380.00	Lock/key replacement
Repairs: Towel rail	$99.37	Repairs: Towel rail
Rubbish removal	$190.00	Rubbish removal
Net award	$1,819.37
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,819.37

The landlord attended the remote hearing.

The tenant did not attend the hearing. Telephone calls were made to the tenant on the number provided. The call was initially answered, but immediately disconnected by the tenant. The Tribunal may hear matters in the absence of a party where satisfied that notice of the hearing has been given. I am satisfied that notice of the hearing was given to the tenant.

The landlord has applied for compensation following the end of the tenancy.

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 did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. The landlord provided photos of the rubbish remaining at the premises and an invoice for rubbish removal and tip fees of $190.00.

The landlord has provided photos of the premises at the end of the tenancy which show that cleaning was required to bring the premises to a reasonably clean and tidy standard. The Tribunal will accept claims for landlord labour at a maximum hourly rate of $30.00. I consider a total claim for cleaning of $150.00 to be reasonable.

The landlord has cleaned the carpet. The landlord explained that cat urine was all through the lounge and bedrooms. He said that to alleviate the odour he had to clean the carpet twice. At an hourly rate of $30.00, I consider a charge of $300.00 (which includes equipment) to be reasonable.

The tenant did not return the keys. The landlord has provided an invoice from a locksmith for $380.00.

The amounts ordered are proven.

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.

The following damage was caused during the tenancy: A towel rail had been damaged, having become detached from the wall. The towel rail was repaired by an electrician. The landlord provided a copy of the invoice for $99.37. Walls and ceilings have been damaged by the tenant. Photos of the damage were provided by the landlord. The landlord has had the walls and ceiling plastered. An invoice for $230.00 for the plastering has been provided. Once the plastering had been completed, the landlord has sanded and painted the walls. I consider that a reasonable charge for the work completed by the landlord, including materials, is $470.00.

The damage referred to above is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The amounts ordered are proved.

I have taken into account betterment and depreciation. 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.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5241456 — net $1,819.37 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning	$150.00	Cleaning
Carpet Cleaning	$300.00	Carpet Cleaning
Repairs: Painting	$470.00	Repairs: Painting
Repairs: Gib stopping	$230.00	Repairs: Gib stopping
Lock/key replacement	$380.00	Lock/key replacement
Repairs: Towel rail	$99.37	Repairs: Towel rail
Rubbish removal	$190.00	Rubbish removal
Net award	$1,819.37
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,819.37

Order

Casey Dixon must pay Michael John Brisco $1,819.37 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the remote hearing.
The tenant did not attend the hearing. Telephone calls were made to the tenant on the number provided. The call was initially answered, but immediately disconnected by the tenant. The Tribunal may hear matters in the absence of a party where satisfied that notice of the hearing has been given. I am satisfied that notice of the hearing was given to the tenant.
The landlord has applied for compensation following the end of the tenancy.

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 did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. The landlord provided photos of the rubbish remaining at the premises and an invoice for rubbish removal and tip fees of $190.00.
The landlord has provided photos of the premises at the end of the tenancy which show that cleaning was required to bring the premises to a reasonably clean and tidy standard. The Tribunal will accept claims for landlord labour at a maximum hourly rate of $30.00. I consider a total claim for cleaning of $150.00 to be reasonable.
The landlord has cleaned the carpet. The landlord explained that cat urine was all through the lounge and bedrooms. He said that to alleviate the odour he had to clean the carpet twice. At an hourly rate of $30.00, I consider a charge of $300.00 (which includes equipment) to be reasonable.
The tenant did not return the keys. The landlord has provided an invoice from a locksmith for $380.00.
The amounts ordered are proven.

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.
The following damage was caused during the tenancy: A towel rail had been damaged, having become detached from the wall. The towel rail was repaired by an electrician. The landlord provided a copy of the invoice for $99.37. Walls and ceilings have been damaged by the tenant. Photos of the damage were provided by the landlord. The landlord has had the walls and ceiling plastered. An invoice for $230.00 for the plastering has been provided. Once the plastering had been completed, the landlord has sanded and painted the walls. I consider that a reasonable charge for the work completed by the landlord, including materials, is $470.00.
The damage referred to above is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved.
I have taken into account betterment and depreciation. 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.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5241456 — Property damage at 93 Argyle Street, Hawera, Hawera 4610

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5241456 — Property damage at 93 Argyle Street, Hawera, Hawera 4610

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Frequently asked questions