How much money was awarded in case 5283519?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lightbulbs: $17.25 awarded to landlord; Pest Control: $58.22 awarded to landlord; Car Port: $287.50 awarded to landlord; Door Handles: $54.63 awarded to landlord; Holes In Walls: $2,000.00 awarded to landlord; Internal Doors: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Kitchen Kickboard: $115.00 awarded to landlord; Picket Fence: $207.00 awarded to landlord; Repaint Ceilings: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Wardrobe Door: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Window Catches: $172.50 awarded to landlord; Kitchen Vinyl: $900.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Curtains: $250.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,295.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5283519?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5283519?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12715451-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5283519?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lightbulbs: $17.25 awarded to landlord; Pest Control: $58.22 awarded to landlord; Car Port: $287.50 awarded to landlord; Door Handles: $54.63 awarded to landlord; Holes In Walls: $2,000.00 awarded to landlord; Internal Doors: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Kitchen Kickboard: $115.00 awarded to landlord; Picket Fence: $207.00 awarded to landlord; Repaint Ceilings: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Wardrobe Door: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Window Catches: $172.50 awarded to landlord; Kitchen Vinyl: $900.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Curtains: $250.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,295.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5283519?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5283519?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12715451-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

98B Western Road, Ngongotaha, Rotorua 3010 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5283519 — Property damage

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5283519 about?

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

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5283519 — net $6,184.10 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rubbish removal	$1,295.00	Rubbish removal
Pest control	$58.22	Pest control
Repairs: repaint ceilings	$500.00	Repairs: repaint ceilings
Repairs: holes in walls	$2,000.00	Repairs: holes in walls
Repairs: internal doors	$200.00	Repairs: internal doors
Repairs: wardrobe door	$100.00	Repairs: wardrobe door
Repairs: picket fence	$207.00	Repairs: picket fence
Repairs: door handles	$54.63	Repairs: door handles
Repairs: car port	$287.50	Repairs: car port
Repairs: window catches	$172.50	Repairs: window catches
Repairs: kitchen kickboard	$115.00	Repairs: kitchen kickboard
Replace furnishings: carpet and vinyl	$900.00	Replace furnishings: carpet and vinyl
Replace furnishings: curtains	$250.00	Replace furnishings: curtains
Light bulbs/batteries	$17.25	Light bulbs/batteries
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$6,184.10
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$6,184.10

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

Sarah Joyce and Stephen Davies must pay [The landlord/s] $6,184.10 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below. DescriptionLandlord Rubbish removal$1,295.00 Pest control$58.22 Repairs: repaint ceilings$500.00 Repairs: holes in walls$2,000.00 Repairs: internal doors$200.00 Repairs: wardrobe door$100.00 Repairs: picket fence$207.00 Repairs: door handles$54.63 Repairs: car port$287.50 Repairs: window catches$172.50 Repairs: kitchen kickboard$115.00 Replace furnishings: carpet and vinyl$900.00 Replace furnishings: curtains$250.00 Light bulbs/batteries$17.25 Filing fee reimbursement$27.00 Total award$6,184.10 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$6,184.10

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing by telephone.

The tenant had notified the Tribunal that they would not be attending the hearing. They were telephoned on both numbers provided but neither answered.

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, and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.

The landlord provided photographic evidence that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. From the evidence it appeared as if the tenant had taken what they wanted, left anything else behind and made no attempt to clean.

The tenant did not return the keys.

A curtain in bedroom 2 had been removed and the landlord had to replace light bulbs.

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 following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. There were holes and damage to the walls of every room. Some of the holes were very large. The tenant had tried to plaster some of them, but the work was not done to a professional standard. b. The tenant had unprofessionally painted some of the walls and some ceilings. c. The internal doors to the lounge and bedroom 2 had been damaged by force. d. Door handles had been broken and replaced with mismatched and ill-fitting hardware. e. The wardrobe door in bedroom 1 had been removed and its mirror was missing. f. Carpet in the lounge had been removed. g. Carpet in the bedrooms had been so badly stained that the stains could not be removed. h. The vinyl in the kitchen had been slashed or cut in multiple places. i. The vinyl in the laundry had been permanently stained. j. Pickets in the front fence had been broken. k. There were several large holes in the carport wall. l. Window catches had been forced and broken and then screwed shut. m. The kickboard in the kitchen was broken. n. A curtain was damaged by what the landlord believes was cat claws.

The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. From the nature and extent of the damage, much of which will have required considerable force, it was intentional. The repainting of the ceilings and walls by the tenant without the landlord’s consent was intentional damage.

The amounts ordered are proved.

I have considered 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.

The landlord was unsure of the age of the carpet and vinyl. Both items still had a residual value and would not have required replacement but for the intentional damage inflicted by the tenant. A sum reflecting that residual value has been awarded.

While the damage to the walls, ceilings and doors has been considerable, the landlord is not entitled to the full costs of redecorating the property. Some allowance must be made for the fact that the walls were not freshly painted at the start of the tenancy and had suffered usual wear and tear. For the same reason, small deductions have been made from other items that have had to be replaced.

Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5283519 — net $6,184.10 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rubbish removal	$1,295.00	Rubbish removal
Pest control	$58.22	Pest control
Repairs: repaint ceilings	$500.00	Repairs: repaint ceilings
Repairs: holes in walls	$2,000.00	Repairs: holes in walls
Repairs: internal doors	$200.00	Repairs: internal doors
Repairs: wardrobe door	$100.00	Repairs: wardrobe door
Repairs: picket fence	$207.00	Repairs: picket fence
Repairs: door handles	$54.63	Repairs: door handles
Repairs: car port	$287.50	Repairs: car port
Repairs: window catches	$172.50	Repairs: window catches
Repairs: kitchen kickboard	$115.00	Repairs: kitchen kickboard
Replace furnishings: carpet and vinyl	$900.00	Replace furnishings: carpet and vinyl
Replace furnishings: curtains	$250.00	Replace furnishings: curtains
Light bulbs/batteries	$17.25	Light bulbs/batteries
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$6,184.10
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$6,184.10

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
Sarah Joyce and Stephen Davies must pay [The landlord/s] $6,184.10 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below. DescriptionLandlord Rubbish removal$1,295.00 Pest control$58.22 Repairs: repaint ceilings$500.00 Repairs: holes in walls$2,000.00 Repairs: internal doors$200.00 Repairs: wardrobe door$100.00 Repairs: picket fence$207.00 Repairs: door handles$54.63 Repairs: car port$287.50 Repairs: window catches$172.50 Repairs: kitchen kickboard$115.00 Replace furnishings: carpet and vinyl$900.00 Replace furnishings: curtains$250.00 Light bulbs/batteries$17.25 Filing fee reimbursement$27.00 Total award$6,184.10 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$6,184.10

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing by telephone.
The tenant had notified the Tribunal that they would not be attending the hearing. They were telephoned on both numbers provided but neither answered.
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, and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The landlord provided photographic evidence that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. From the evidence it appeared as if the tenant had taken what they wanted, left anything else behind and made no attempt to clean.
The tenant did not return the keys.
A curtain in bedroom 2 had been removed and the landlord had to replace light bulbs.
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 following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. There were holes and damage to the walls of every room. Some of the holes were very large. The tenant had tried to plaster some of them, but the work was not done to a professional standard. b. The tenant had unprofessionally painted some of the walls and some ceilings. c. The internal doors to the lounge and bedroom 2 had been damaged by force. d. Door handles had been broken and replaced with mismatched and ill-fitting hardware. e. The wardrobe door in bedroom 1 had been removed and its mirror was missing. f. Carpet in the lounge had been removed. g. Carpet in the bedrooms had been so badly stained that the stains could not be removed. h. The vinyl in the kitchen had been slashed or cut in multiple places. i. The vinyl in the laundry had been permanently stained. j. Pickets in the front fence had been broken. k. There were several large holes in the carport wall. l. Window catches had been forced and broken and then screwed shut. m. The kickboard in the kitchen was broken. n. A curtain was damaged by what the landlord believes was cat claws.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. From the nature and extent of the damage, much of which will have required considerable force, it was intentional. The repainting of the ceilings and walls by the tenant without the landlord’s consent was intentional damage.
The amounts ordered are proved.
I have considered 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.
The landlord was unsure of the age of the carpet and vinyl. Both items still had a residual value and would not have required replacement but for the intentional damage inflicted by the tenant. A sum reflecting that residual value has been awarded.
While the damage to the walls, ceilings and doors has been considerable, the landlord is not entitled to the full costs of redecorating the property. Some allowance must be made for the fact that the walls were not freshly painted at the start of the tenancy and had suffered usual wear and tear. For the same reason, small deductions have been made from other items that have had to be replaced.
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5283519 — Property damage at 98B Western Road, Ngongotaha, Rotorua 3010

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5283519 — Property damage at 98B Western Road, Ngongotaha, Rotorua 3010

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