What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5265784?

The tribunal order states: Ashley Nepia-Peeni must pay Austar Property Services Limited $1,399.56

How much money was awarded in case 5265784?

Cleaning: $230.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $400.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $615.82 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,500.00 awarded to landlord; Unblock Drain Of Kitty Litter: $171.35 awarded to landlord; Windowsills, Joinery: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $161.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $59.10 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5265784?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5265784?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12246161-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5265784?

The tribunal order states: Ashley Nepia-Peeni must pay Austar Property Services Limited $1,399.56

How much money was awarded in case 5265784?

Cleaning: $230.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $400.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $615.82 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,500.00 awarded to landlord; Unblock Drain Of Kitty Litter: $171.35 awarded to landlord; Windowsills, Joinery: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $161.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $59.10 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5265784?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5265784?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12246161-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

8 Eileen Newey Place, Henderson, Auckland 0612 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5265784 — Property damage

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5265784 — net $1,399.56 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Water rates	$59.10	Water rates
Cleaning	$400.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$161.00	Rubbish removal
Lawns and garden work	$100.00	Lawns and garden work
Repairs: Insurance excess carpet	$1,500.00	Repairs: Insurance excess carpet
Repairs: windowsills, joinery	$200.00	Repairs: windowsills, joinery
Repairs: unblock drain of kitty litter	$171.35	Repairs: unblock drain of kitty litter
Electrical fittings replacement/repair: waste disposal	$615.82	Electrical fittings replacement/repair: waste disposal
Carpet cleaning	$230.00	Carpet cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,399.56
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,399.56

The landlord attended the hearing and was represented by Ms Haslam. The tenant did not attend the hearing.

The landlord has applied for compensation, damages, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for water rates?

The landlord provided water rates invoices which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy was $59.10.

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 and remove all rubbish. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

At the end of the tenancy, the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. Paw marks from a dog were on the windows, the carpet was badly stained with brown marks which the landlord said were faeces and urine stains from the pet dog and cats, food was left in the sink, and the utility areas were not properly clean. The landlord provided photographs and invoices in support of the claims and stated that the premises smelled horribly of pet faeces and urine.

The invoice for cleaning is for $747.50. Having seen the photographs I consider this to be an excessive amount for cleaning and I have made a reduced award based on ten hours at $40.00 per hour in order to return the premises to a reasonably clean and tidy condition. It is usual for a landlord to undertake a deeper clean between tenancies, but this is not the standard required of a tenant.

The landlord produced an invoice in support of the carpet cleaning which they say was not a success.

The landlord claims the tenant left belongings of no value and rubbish, inside and outside the premises at the end of the tenancy. Photographs corroborate this information. An invoice for $161.00 was provide for rubbish removal.

The landlord claims the lawns needed mowing and the patio area needed weeding. Photographs and an invoice for $172.50 were produced. I consider this an excessive amount for the work needed as depicted in the photographs, and I have awarded a lesser amount based on what I consider reasonable for this work.

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.

The landlord claims there was a significant amount of damage at the end of the tenancy, including the following: a. The carpet in the master bedroom, two other bedrooms, landings stairwells and study was badly stained from pet urine and faeces. Cleaning did not remove the stains or the smell, b. Scratches on windowsills and joinery, c. The ensuite bathroom drain was blocked with kitty litter, d. The waste-disposal, had stones in it, and when removed it no longer functioned.

The landlord produced photographs and invoices in support, and is claiming $1,500.00 excess for the carpet replacement, $345.00 for repair and repaint of the joinery, $171.35 for unblocking the ensuite drain, and $821.10 for replacing the waste-disposal.

I must take 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.

For the claims for the repairs to the joinery and the replacement of the waste disposal I have therefore reduced the awards.

I consider the carpet damage to be intentional in that it appears to have occurred repeatedly and unabated throughout the tenancy, the drain blocking and damage to the waste disposal to be intentional, and the damage to the windowsills to be a combination of fair wear and tear and careless damage.

The amounts ordered are proved.

The landlord is claiming $126.50 for a carpet condition report. I consider this unusual: Insurance companies have assessors to assess damage and claims. The landlord contracting a carpet report is an extra step that I do not consider can be justified in charging back to the tenant.

Because Austar Property Services Limited has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5265784 — net $1,399.56 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Water rates	$59.10	Water rates
Cleaning	$400.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$161.00	Rubbish removal
Lawns and garden work	$100.00	Lawns and garden work
Repairs: Insurance excess carpet	$1,500.00	Repairs: Insurance excess carpet
Repairs: windowsills, joinery	$200.00	Repairs: windowsills, joinery
Repairs: unblock drain of kitty litter	$171.35	Repairs: unblock drain of kitty litter
Electrical fittings replacement/repair: waste disposal	$615.82	Electrical fittings replacement/repair: waste disposal
Carpet cleaning	$230.00	Carpet cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,399.56
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,399.56

Order

Ashley Nepia-Peeni must pay Austar Property Services Limited $1,399.56 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the outstanding bond of $2,064.71 (6486044-002) to Austar Property Services Limited immediately.
The claim for a carpet condition report is dismissed.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing and was represented by Ms Haslam. The tenant did not attend the hearing.
The landlord has applied for compensation, damages, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for water rates?

The landlord provided water rates invoices which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy was $59.10.

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 and remove all rubbish. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
At the end of the tenancy, the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. Paw marks from a dog were on the windows, the carpet was badly stained with brown marks which the landlord said were faeces and urine stains from the pet dog and cats, food was left in the sink, and the utility areas were not properly clean. The landlord provided photographs and invoices in support of the claims and stated that the premises smelled horribly of pet faeces and urine.
The invoice for cleaning is for $747.50. Having seen the photographs I consider this to be an excessive amount for cleaning and I have made a reduced award based on ten hours at $40.00 per hour in order to return the premises to a reasonably clean and tidy condition. It is usual for a landlord to undertake a deeper clean between tenancies, but this is not the standard required of a tenant.
The landlord produced an invoice in support of the carpet cleaning which they say was not a success.
The landlord claims the tenant left belongings of no value and rubbish, inside and outside the premises at the end of the tenancy. Photographs corroborate this information. An invoice for $161.00 was provide for rubbish removal.
The landlord claims the lawns needed mowing and the patio area needed weeding. Photographs and an invoice for $172.50 were produced. I consider this an excessive amount for the work needed as depicted in the photographs, and I have awarded a lesser amount based on what I consider reasonable for this work.
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.
The landlord claims there was a significant amount of damage at the end of the tenancy, including the following: a. The carpet in the master bedroom, two other bedrooms, landings stairwells and study was badly stained from pet urine and faeces. Cleaning did not remove the stains or the smell, b. Scratches on windowsills and joinery, c. The ensuite bathroom drain was blocked with kitty litter, d. The waste-disposal, had stones in it, and when removed it no longer functioned.
The landlord produced photographs and invoices in support, and is claiming $1,500.00 excess for the carpet replacement, $345.00 for repair and repaint of the joinery, $171.35 for unblocking the ensuite drain, and $821.10 for replacing the waste-disposal.
I must take 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.
For the claims for the repairs to the joinery and the replacement of the waste disposal I have therefore reduced the awards.
I consider the carpet damage to be intentional in that it appears to have occurred repeatedly and unabated throughout the tenancy, the drain blocking and damage to the waste disposal to be intentional, and the damage to the windowsills to be a combination of fair wear and tear and careless damage.
The amounts ordered are proved.
The landlord is claiming $126.50 for a carpet condition report. I consider this unusual: Insurance companies have assessors to assess damage and claims. The landlord contracting a carpet report is an extra step that I do not consider can be justified in charging back to the tenant.
Because Austar Property Services Limited has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5265784 — Property damage at 8 Eileen Newey Place, Henderson, Auckland 0612

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5265784 — Property damage at 8 Eileen Newey Place, Henderson, Auckland 0612

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for water rates?

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for water rates?

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions