How much money was awarded in case 5277539?

Bed Sheets: $30.00 awarded to landlord; Bedroom Wardrobe Door: $59.75 awarded to landlord; Chairs X 2: $70.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Heat Pump Remote: $49.00 awarded to landlord; Lounge And Bedroom Net Curtains: $45.00 awarded to landlord; Microwave: $80.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $13.12 awarded to landlord; Labour Costs: $465.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $180.00 awarded to landlord; Wall Paintings: $100.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5277539?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5277539?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12333028-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5277539?

Bed Sheets: $30.00 awarded to landlord; Bedroom Wardrobe Door: $59.75 awarded to landlord; Chairs X 2: $70.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Heat Pump Remote: $49.00 awarded to landlord; Lounge And Bedroom Net Curtains: $45.00 awarded to landlord; Microwave: $80.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $13.12 awarded to landlord; Labour Costs: $465.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $180.00 awarded to landlord; Wall Paintings: $100.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5277539?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5277539?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12333028-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5277539 — Property damage

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5277539 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5277539 — net $1,118.87 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Repairs: Labour costs	$465.00	Repairs: Labour costs
Bed sheets	$30.00	Bed sheets
Lock/key replacement	$13.12	Lock/key replacement
Bedroom wardrobe door	$59.75	Bedroom wardrobe door
Heat pump remote	$49.00	Heat pump remote
Wall paintings	$100.00	Wall paintings
Chairs x 2	$70.00	Chairs x 2
Microwave	$80.00	Microwave
Lounge and bedroom net curtains	$45.00	Lounge and bedroom net curtains
Cleaning and rubbish removal	$180.00	Cleaning and rubbish removal
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,118.87
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,118.87

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

Gemini Ray Oakley-Wharepapa and Jaylee-Nadia Newell must pay [the landlord] $1,118.87 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenants did not appear.

The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee 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 is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.

The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.

The tenant did not return 2 keys.

The following chattels were missing at the end of the tenancy: 2 bedsheets, 5 wall paintings, 2 wooden chairs, heat pump control, microwave, and 2 net curtains.

The amounts ordered are proved. I have awarded 50% of the amount claimed ($140.00) for replacement wooden chairs due to their age and likely condition. I can only award a nominal amount for the 5 missing pictures as there is no indication of their value. I award $100.00 as nominal compensation.

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 following damage was caused during the tenancy: broken wardrobe door, and multiple holes in walls and doors. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The amounts ordered are proved. Recovery costs

The landlord is seeking $999.25 recovery costs for a previous order for this tenancy under application 5236375, and $577.78 for this application. The landlord says they are entitled to 25% of the total amount awarded in accordance with their tenancy agreement.

In accordance with the tenancy agreement, “Tenants shall pay 25% as cost of recovery of rental arrears and any damages caused by the tenant.”

However, section 102(5) RTA states that, “The Tribunal may make an order to give effect, in whole or in part, to a provision in a tenancy agreement requiring one party (the debtor) to reimburse the other party (the creditor) for any reasonable expenses or commissions paid or incurred by the creditor in recovering, or attempting to recover, any overdue payment that the debtor owes to the creditor under an order of the Tribunal.”

As discussed at the hearing, a notional rate of 25% conflicts with ‘reasonable expenses paid or incurred’ as envisaged by section 102(5). This clause in the tenancy agreement is therefore not enforceable in accordance with section 11 RTA and may also constitute an unlawful act in accordance with section 137 RTA.

I decline to make any award for enforcement costs as the landlord was unable to provide any evidence of reasonable expenses or commissions paid or incurred. Lost rent

The landlord claims $1,380.00 for 2 weeks of ‘lost rent’ while they were cleaning and repairing damages.

Tenants are not required to leave premises in such a condition that a new tenant can move in straight away. A realistic landlord’s business plan should, therefore, include an allowance for some loss of rent between tenancies, particularly where a tenancy has lasted for some time.

This part of the claim is dismissed. The damage was not extensive and there is no evidence that a new tenancy was delayed due to the time taken to remedy. Restraining order

The landlord also sought an order restraining the tenants from entering the premises and complex.

As discussed, by virtue of section 109A RTA, the Tribunal may restrain further commission of unlawful acts under the RTA, but only if an order has been made under section 109 RTA.

This part of the claim is dismissed. Filing fee & name suppression

As the landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim, the tenant must reimburse the filing fee.

The landlord is entitled to name suppression as requested on their application form.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5277539 — net $1,118.87 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Repairs: Labour costs	$465.00	Repairs: Labour costs
Bed sheets	$30.00	Bed sheets
Lock/key replacement	$13.12	Lock/key replacement
Bedroom wardrobe door	$59.75	Bedroom wardrobe door
Heat pump remote	$49.00	Heat pump remote
Wall paintings	$100.00	Wall paintings
Chairs x 2	$70.00	Chairs x 2
Microwave	$80.00	Microwave
Lounge and bedroom net curtains	$45.00	Lounge and bedroom net curtains
Cleaning and rubbish removal	$180.00	Cleaning and rubbish removal
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,118.87
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,118.87

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord name and identifying details.
Gemini Ray Oakley-Wharepapa and Jaylee-Nadia Newell must pay [the landlord] $1,118.87 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenants did not appear.
The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee 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 is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
The tenant did not return 2 keys.
The following chattels were missing at the end of the tenancy: 2 bedsheets, 5 wall paintings, 2 wooden chairs, heat pump control, microwave, and 2 net curtains.
The amounts ordered are proved. I have awarded 50% of the amount claimed ($140.00) for replacement wooden chairs due to their age and likely condition. I can only award a nominal amount for the 5 missing pictures as there is no indication of their value. I award $100.00 as nominal compensation.

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 following damage was caused during the tenancy: broken wardrobe door, and multiple holes in walls and doors. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved. Recovery costs
The landlord is seeking $999.25 recovery costs for a previous order for this tenancy under application 5236375, and $577.78 for this application. The landlord says they are entitled to 25% of the total amount awarded in accordance with their tenancy agreement.
In accordance with the tenancy agreement, “Tenants shall pay 25% as cost of recovery of rental arrears and any damages caused by the tenant.”
However, section 102(5) RTA states that, “The Tribunal may make an order to give effect, in whole or in part, to a provision in a tenancy agreement requiring one party (the debtor) to reimburse the other party (the creditor) for any reasonable expenses or commissions paid or incurred by the creditor in recovering, or attempting to recover, any overdue payment that the debtor owes to the creditor under an order of the Tribunal.”
As discussed at the hearing, a notional rate of 25% conflicts with ‘reasonable expenses paid or incurred’ as envisaged by section 102(5). This clause in the tenancy agreement is therefore not enforceable in accordance with section 11 RTA and may also constitute an unlawful act in accordance with section 137 RTA.
I decline to make any award for enforcement costs as the landlord was unable to provide any evidence of reasonable expenses or commissions paid or incurred. Lost rent
The landlord claims $1,380.00 for 2 weeks of ‘lost rent’ while they were cleaning and repairing damages.
Tenants are not required to leave premises in such a condition that a new tenant can move in straight away. A realistic landlord’s business plan should, therefore, include an allowance for some loss of rent between tenancies, particularly where a tenancy has lasted for some time.
This part of the claim is dismissed. The damage was not extensive and there is no evidence that a new tenancy was delayed due to the time taken to remedy. Restraining order
The landlord also sought an order restraining the tenants from entering the premises and complex.
As discussed, by virtue of section 109A RTA, the Tribunal may restrain further commission of unlawful acts under the RTA, but only if an order has been made under section 109 RTA.
This part of the claim is dismissed. Filing fee & name suppression
As the landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim, the tenant must reimburse the filing fee.
The landlord is entitled to name suppression as requested on their application form.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5277539 — Property damage

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5277539 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

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

Dismissed claims

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