What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5254319 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 5254319?

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 5254319?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5254319?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12073170-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5254319 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 5254319?

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 5254319?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5254319?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12073170-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5254319 — Property damage

Order

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

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. There was no appearance for the tenant.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy was to end on 14 February 2025. The landlord agreed to extend the tenancy to 18 February 2025 and provided a copy of an email to the tenant confirming that. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy was $217.14.

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

When the landlord attended the premises at the end of the tenancy, he found a flatmate living there along with a dog.
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 landlord provided photographs at the end of the tenancy showing that no attempt had been made to clean the premises. There were dirty dishes, and food, left in the kitchen. Debris was everywhere.
I accept the landlord’s description of the property and some of the work required as set out in his summary: The tenant had been living in squalid conditions and no attempt had been made to clean up the property, remove any rubbish or personal effects. Cupboards were still full, dishes were piled up in the sink and bench, bathroom still had personal items, furniture was still in all rooms, cigarette butts and ashtrays littered the interior and exterior of the property and the woodsheds were piled up with a tremendous amount of rubbish that the tenant had collected. Two skip bins and many hours of stressful and disgusting work was undertaken to shift all of the tenant’s rubbish and possessions from the property. Shifting the rubbish from the woodsheds required the purchase of a wheelbarrow, and fortunately the assistance of the flatmate. The Salvation Army and Women’s Refugee were offered the furniture and what they didn’t take was broken up and placed into the skip bins after six days. ... Baseball bats and chains were found under beds and couches. The wood burner was loaded up with the remnants of burnt aluminium cans and glass bottles, requiring a bucket and dustpan/broom to be purchased. The bathroom required an immediate application of Exit Mould and personal items removed with gloves before being considered hygienic enough for occupancy and professional cleaners.
The landlord claimed the following costs: Two WM 9m3 skip bins $864.00 Rubbish bags $18.98 Gloves $7.18 Dustpan/broom $7.98 Bucket $17.99 Exit Mould $8.48 Wheelbarrow $104.00 Hours (17hrs @ $40/hr) $680.00 Travel (208km @ $1.04/km)$216.32 (two additional round trips - 20 & 23 Feb)
It was explained at the hearing that the tenant is not responsible for the landlord’s travel costs or the wheelbarrow that the landlord bought. The Tribunal has also reduced the hourly rate to $30.00 an hour, which comes to $510.
The tenant must reimburse the landlord for the remaining expenses, as well as the cost of the internal clean. The landlord submitted an invoice and receipt for $536.92.
The lawns had not been mown. The landlord said that at the final inspection the flatmate promised to mow the lawns, but it never eventuated. Therefore Crewcut were eventually contracted to mow the lawns. He provided an invoice for $80.00.
The landlord also provided a receipt for the costs of dumping items. He said: During the tenancy the garage had been heavily carpeted and the walls and windows had been boarded up and lined with underlay and black material. Whilst a lot of the wall lining was removed by the flatmate there was an extensive quantity of boards, material, carpet, underlay, rubbish and personal effects remaining in the garage. This was all loaded onto a trailer, along with all grass clippings, a couch and remaining rubbish, and dumped on 16th March.
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.
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. Door Locks
The landlord said that no keys were initially returned by the tenant so the first job was to secure the property. A replacement deadbolt was immediately installed in the lounge door.
The garage door had been padlocked so the door lock was jimmied open and bolt cutters were purchased to cut the padlock. The garage door lock was subsequently replaced.
The mortice lock for the lounge door had been damaged and disposed of during the tenancy. The had been asked to fix this, but had not done so. Attempts were unsuccessfully made to bog up the holes and even replace the mortice lock. A replacement lock and handle set was purchased and installed by the landlord.
The landlord provided receipts for the following: Deadbolt for lounge door $ 20.70 Bolt cutters $ 35.98 Garage door lock $ 9.95 Mortice lock $ 40.03 $106.66
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. Garage Tilt door
The landlord said that during the tenancy the garage tilt door had been levered open. The steel structure of the tilt door was bent and snapped, causing the door to no longer function. The garage door was deemed to be unrepairable by a professional and would require replacement. The landlord provided photographs confirming the damage.
The landlord bought a second-hand door from Greytown for $350. In addition, he claimed $65.00 for trailer hire and 8 hours for his time, which comes to $240.00, making a total cost of $655.00. That amount is ordered. Downpipe and broken window
The landlord said that during a property inspection conducted on 28 January 2025, it was discovered that a downpipe had been removed from the property and a window in the blue room had been broken. The tenant was advised of this in writing and requested to complete repairs by 11 February. The tenant made no effort to replace the downpipe or repair the window. The tenant was also reminded of the need to rectify these items ahead of the final inspection, which also did not occur.
Photographs of the damage were provided to the Tribunal.
The items were fixed by Handy Buggers Ltd by 28 February. The landlord provided an invoice for the two repairs totalling $639.52 including GST. Carpet and curtains
The landlord said the carpet in the green room had been destroyed by having four large rectangles cut into it sometime during the tenancy, measuring approx. 70-80cm by 50 cm. A professional carpet repairer was engaged who advised that the damage isn’t repairable as so many of the long cuts were across the pattern. There was also large white irreparable staining which the repairer suspected to be paint which couldn’t be lifted.
Photos provided show the damage as described.
The landlord decided to replace the entire carpet. As well as the cuts, there was a strong smell of cigarette smoke and ash and dog throughout all the rooms.
The landlord provided a quote and invoice for $3,443.75 for carpeting three bedrooms. He sought a contribution.
The landlord provided photographs showing a ripped curtain over the lounge door and showing that the curtains in one bedroom were now mismatched.
He said that as the tenant had been smoking, all other bedroom curtains were also replaced as the smell of smoke in them was strong. The landlord replaced them with cheap curtains. They could not clean them for the replacement cost.
The landlord claimed: Lounge curtain $ 29.00 Green room curtains $119.98 Master and Blue room curtains$239.96
He provided receipts as follows: a. Briscoes for $179.97 for three curtains. b. K-Mart for $29.00 for a lounge curtain
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. In calculating depreciation, I have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.
The landlord has owned the property for 20 years. Therefore, I have not ordered the full replacement costs. The landlord has had the benefit of the use of the carpet for that time and the benefit of the depreciation on any income derived from the property.
I accept that the carpet was in reasonable condition before the tenancy. Although no photographs of the start of the tenancy were provided, the photos post-tenancy show that but for the squares cut out of the carpet, it was in reasonable condition. I accept that it would not have required replacement but for the damage.
I order the tenant to contribute $600.00 to replacement carpet and $339.00 towards the curtains, being $20 for lounge curtain, $119.98 for the green room because the curtains had been replaced/mismatched, and $200 for the remaining rooms. Filing fee
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5254319 — Property damage

Tenancy Tribunal case 5254319 — Property damage

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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 comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?