How much money was awarded in case 5288220?

Rubbish Removal: $1,450.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $247.47 awarded to landlord; Removing Belongings To Storage: $360.00 awarded to landlord; Bench Top: $437.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Shower Slide: $97.37 awarded to landlord; Smoke Alarms: $55.91 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $196.68 awarded to landlord; Wi-Fi Cost For 2 Months: $110.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5288220?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Smoke alarms.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5288220?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12386785-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5288220?

Rubbish Removal: $1,450.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $247.47 awarded to landlord; Removing Belongings To Storage: $360.00 awarded to landlord; Bench Top: $437.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Shower Slide: $97.37 awarded to landlord; Smoke Alarms: $55.91 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $196.68 awarded to landlord; Wi-Fi Cost For 2 Months: $110.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5288220?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Smoke alarms.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5288220?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12386785-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5288220 — Property damage

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5288220 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 5288220 — net $1,661.43 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Wi-Fi cost for 2 months	$110.00	Wi-Fi cost for 2 months
Replace smoke alarms: x3	$55.91	Replace smoke alarms: x3
Lock/key replacement: x2	$247.47	Lock/key replacement: x2
Repairs: bench top	$437.00	Repairs: bench top
Replace furnishings: shower slide	$97.37	Replace furnishings: shower slide
Cleaning: carpets, curtains & rubbish removal	$1,450.00	Cleaning: carpets, curtains & rubbish removal
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Rubbish removal: transfer station costs	$196.68	Rubbish removal: transfer station costs
Removing belongings to storage	$360.00	Removing belongings to storage
Net award	$1,661.43
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,661.43

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

The landlord may dispose of the goods left at the premises by the tenant as the landlord sees fit.

Sandy Ander and Ben Bennet must pay [The landlord/s] $1,661.43 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,320.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing represented by [redacted].

The tenants did not attend and not answer the calls made to their phone during the hearing. They had been notified of the hearing by email and text, accordingly pursuant to section 92 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) the hearing continued in their absence.

The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. As applicant, they have the evidential burden of proving their claims to the standard of the balance of probabilities, or what is more likely than not.

How much is owed for Wi-Fi charges?

The tenancy ended on 20 June by tenant notice. The parties had an agreement that the tenants would pay $55 per month to the landlord to pay for their Wi-Fi provision. The landlord has established in evidence that the tenants did not pay their allocation for the final two months of the tenancy.

I find this claim proven in evidence and as such make the order as sought.

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) RTA.

The landlord has established in evidence that the tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. The photos show they had made no attempt to clean the property before they vacated and left a considerable number of belongings. The rubbish disposed of amounted to 280kg.

The tenants did not return the keys and as such the locks had to be replaced. The landlord claims only for the cost incurred in purchasing replacement locks which they installed themselves.

The landlord has proven in evidence that the shower slide and three smoke alarms had been removed at the end of the tenancy. As such the tenants are liable for these replacement costs. The cost is only the item cost as the landlords installed the slides and alarms themselves.

The landlord also claims compensation for having to remove the tenants’ belongings to storage. The belongings the landlords have kept in storage for the tenants amount to 2 sheds and a garage-full. The landlord has given clear evidence of the attempts they have made to have the tenants collect their belongings, however they have not engaged with them.

The amounts ordered are considered proven in evidence and reasonable and light of the evidence and circumstances.

The landlord has been storing the tenants’ belongings for three months and it is no longer practicable nor reasonable for them to do so. They are therefore to ascertain the cost of transporting the belongings to the tenant’s new property or disposing of the belongings. They may employ whichever procedure they consider reasonable given the value of the items is not high. See sections 62(3)(b), 62B(2) and (3) RTA.

The tenants are urged to contacts the landlords, or at the least engage with their attempts to have the belongings bought to their property as opposed to them being dumped which will likely incur a higher cost for them.

The landlords may apply to the Tribunal at a later date for an order relating to the costs they may incur in undertaking this process.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The landlord claims reimbursement of the cost incurred to replace a section of the benchtop which they have established in evidence was burnt during the tenancy.

To be successful in such a claim, 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.

I consider that the damage was most likely caused carelessly and as such the tenants should be liable for the repair cost. The cost to the landlord was far below their insurance excess which is $1,000.

The landlord is to undertake this repair prior to the next tenants entering the property later this month. Other orders

As the landlords have been successful in their claims, I direct that the filing fee be reimbursed to them and their application for suppression orders approved.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5288220 — net $1,661.43 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Wi-Fi cost for 2 months	$110.00	Wi-Fi cost for 2 months
Replace smoke alarms: x3	$55.91	Replace smoke alarms: x3
Lock/key replacement: x2	$247.47	Lock/key replacement: x2
Repairs: bench top	$437.00	Repairs: bench top
Replace furnishings: shower slide	$97.37	Replace furnishings: shower slide
Cleaning: carpets, curtains & rubbish removal	$1,450.00	Cleaning: carpets, curtains & rubbish removal
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Rubbish removal: transfer station costs	$196.68	Rubbish removal: transfer station costs
Removing belongings to storage	$360.00	Removing belongings to storage
Net award	$1,661.43
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,661.43

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord name and identifying details.
The landlord may dispose of the goods left at the premises by the tenant as the landlord sees fit.
Sandy Ander and Ben Bennet must pay [The landlord/s] $1,661.43 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,320.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing represented by [redacted].
The tenants did not attend and not answer the calls made to their phone during the hearing. They had been notified of the hearing by email and text, accordingly pursuant to section 92 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) the hearing continued in their absence.
The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. As applicant, they have the evidential burden of proving their claims to the standard of the balance of probabilities, or what is more likely than not.

How much is owed for Wi-Fi charges?

The tenancy ended on 20 June by tenant notice. The parties had an agreement that the tenants would pay $55 per month to the landlord to pay for their Wi-Fi provision. The landlord has established in evidence that the tenants did not pay their allocation for the final two months of the tenancy.
I find this claim proven in evidence and as such make the order as sought.

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) RTA.
The landlord has established in evidence that the tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. The photos show they had made no attempt to clean the property before they vacated and left a considerable number of belongings. The rubbish disposed of amounted to 280kg.
The tenants did not return the keys and as such the locks had to be replaced. The landlord claims only for the cost incurred in purchasing replacement locks which they installed themselves.
The landlord has proven in evidence that the shower slide and three smoke alarms had been removed at the end of the tenancy. As such the tenants are liable for these replacement costs. The cost is only the item cost as the landlords installed the slides and alarms themselves.
The landlord also claims compensation for having to remove the tenants’ belongings to storage. The belongings the landlords have kept in storage for the tenants amount to 2 sheds and a garage-full. The landlord has given clear evidence of the attempts they have made to have the tenants collect their belongings, however they have not engaged with them.
The amounts ordered are considered proven in evidence and reasonable and light of the evidence and circumstances.
The landlord has been storing the tenants’ belongings for three months and it is no longer practicable nor reasonable for them to do so. They are therefore to ascertain the cost of transporting the belongings to the tenant’s new property or disposing of the belongings. They may employ whichever procedure they consider reasonable given the value of the items is not high. See sections 62(3)(b), 62B(2) and (3) RTA.
The tenants are urged to contacts the landlords, or at the least engage with their attempts to have the belongings bought to their property as opposed to them being dumped which will likely incur a higher cost for them.
The landlords may apply to the Tribunal at a later date for an order relating to the costs they may incur in undertaking this process.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The landlord claims reimbursement of the cost incurred to replace a section of the benchtop which they have established in evidence was burnt during the tenancy.
To be successful in such a claim, 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.
I consider that the damage was most likely caused carelessly and as such the tenants should be liable for the repair cost. The cost to the landlord was far below their insurance excess which is $1,000.
The landlord is to undertake this repair prior to the next tenants entering the property later this month. Other orders
As the landlords have been successful in their claims, I direct that the filing fee be reimbursed to them and their application for suppression orders approved.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5288220 — Property damage

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5288220 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for Wi-Fi charges?

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

How much is owed for Wi-Fi charges?

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