What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5289819 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] must pay Mosaic Property Management

How much money was awarded in case 5289819?

Balance Of Methamphetamine Remediati…: $9,082.17 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $600.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Garage Door Remote Controls: $273.70 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5289819?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5289819?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12443699-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5289819 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] must pay Mosaic Property Management

How much money was awarded in case 5289819?

Balance Of Methamphetamine Remediati…: $9,082.17 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $600.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Garage Door Remote Controls: $273.70 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5289819?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5289819?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12443699-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

62 Quartz Drive, Rolleston, Rolleston 7614 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5289819 — Exemplary damages

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5289819 — net $7,782.87 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Exemplary damages – using premises for unlawful purpose	$600.00	Exemplary damages – using premises for unlawful purpose
Replace garage door remote controls	$273.70	Replace garage door remote controls
Balance of methamphetamine remediation costs	$9,082.17	Balance of methamphetamine remediation costs
Net award	$7,782.87
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$7,782.87

[The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] must pay Mosaic Property Management Limited as agent for Philippa and [The landlord/s] $7,782.87 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:

00 Total award$9,982.87 Bond$2,200.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$7,782.87

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,200.00 (5972829-005) to Mosaic Property Management Limited as agent for Philippa and [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Ms Stent and Ms Barnes represented the landlord. Ms [The tenant/s] represented the tenants.

The landlord has applied for compensation, exemplary damages, refund of the bond, 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 (RTA).

The tenant did not return all the garage remote controls.

The amount ordered for the replacement of the garage door remote controls is proved by an invoice. The tenant accepted that she had not returned all the remote controls.

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.

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.

The premises were contaminated with methamphetamine. The individual tests showed levels between 1.34 μg/100cm² and 75.3μg/100cm². 6 individual tests showed levels higher than 15μg/100cm², above which premises are considered contaminated to a point where there is danger to health.

The owner was insured for damage, but the maximum claim level under the policy was set at $50,000.00.

The cost of methamphetamine testing and remediation exceeded the insured sum by $9,082.17. Because this damage was intentional damage the tenant is liable for the actual remediation cost.

Although there was no pre-tenancy test, I find it probable that a person at the premises with the tenants’ consent (a boyfriend of one of the tenants) caused the damage.

The tenancy started in June 2019. It is unlikely that such high levels of methamphetamine would be present since then.

The landlord produced evidence of bags of cannabis, scales, and small plastic bags in a container, possessions owned by the tenants, removed from the premises.

The tenant who attended the hearing confirmed that the items belonged to the other tenant’s boyfriend.

The tenant also confirmed that the other tenant’s boyfriend removed the smoke alarms. It was the smell of smoke that alerted the landlord to have the premises tested.

Taken together I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the tenant’s boyfriend at the premises with the tenants’ consent, used methamphetamine causing the high levels of contamination.

The tenants are therefore liable or the remediation costs.

The landlord withdrew claims for outside rubbish removal ($358.34) and new window seals/roof space rubbish removal ($357.48)

The amount ordered for the cost of methamphetamine remediation is proved. Exemplary damages

Exemplary damages are designed to punish and to deter. They are awarded at the Tribunal’s discretion when one party has proved that the other party has committed an unlawful act. If that is proven, and before the Tribunal can award exemplary damages, it must take account of the factors set out in section 109 RTA. Those factors are: •The intention of the person; •The effect of the unlawful act; •The interests of the party against whom the unlawful act was committed; and •The public interest.

Section 40(2)(b) RTA provides that a tenant shall not use the premises, or permit the premises to be used, for any unlawful purpose.

Methamphetamine is classified as a Class A drug under Schedule 1 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975. Possession or use of methamphetamine is an offence under section 7 of that Act.

Section 40(3A)(c) RTA provides that using the premises or permitting the premises to be used for any unlawful propose is an unlawful act. The Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to $1,800.00 for this unlawful act – see Schedule 1A RTA.

I am satisfied that the section 109 RTA criteria are met in this case. The use of methamphetamine (or allowing its use) is an intentional act; it was against the landlord’s interests and had a detrimental financial effect on the landlord; and it is against the public interest.

I award the landlord exemplary damages of $600.00. Result

The bond will be paid to the landlord. After the deduction of the bond the tenants will pay the landlord $7,782.87. Name suppression.

The landlord did not seek name suppression. The tenant sought name suppression. I make no order for name suppression as the tenants’ defence is unsuccessful 1 .

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5289819 — net $7,782.87 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Exemplary damages – using premises for unlawful purpose	$600.00	Exemplary damages – using premises for unlawful purpose
Replace garage door remote controls	$273.70	Replace garage door remote controls
Balance of methamphetamine remediation costs	$9,082.17	Balance of methamphetamine remediation costs
Net award	$7,782.87
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$7,782.87

Order

[The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] must pay Mosaic Property Management Limited as agent for Philippa and [The landlord/s] $7,782.87 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:
00 Total award$9,982.87 Bond$2,200.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$7,782.87
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,200.00 (5972829-005) to Mosaic Property Management Limited as agent for Philippa and [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Ms Stent and Ms Barnes represented the landlord. Ms [The tenant/s] represented the tenants.
The landlord has applied for compensation, exemplary damages, refund of the bond, 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 (RTA).
The tenant did not return all the garage remote controls.
The amount ordered for the replacement of the garage door remote controls is proved by an invoice. The tenant accepted that she had not returned all the remote controls.

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.
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.
The premises were contaminated with methamphetamine. The individual tests showed levels between 1.34 μg/100cm² and 75.3μg/100cm². 6 individual tests showed levels higher than 15μg/100cm², above which premises are considered contaminated to a point where there is danger to health.
The owner was insured for damage, but the maximum claim level under the policy was set at $50,000.00.
The cost of methamphetamine testing and remediation exceeded the insured sum by $9,082.17. Because this damage was intentional damage the tenant is liable for the actual remediation cost.
Although there was no pre-tenancy test, I find it probable that a person at the premises with the tenants’ consent (a boyfriend of one of the tenants) caused the damage.
The tenancy started in June 2019. It is unlikely that such high levels of methamphetamine would be present since then.
The landlord produced evidence of bags of cannabis, scales, and small plastic bags in a container, possessions owned by the tenants, removed from the premises.
The tenant who attended the hearing confirmed that the items belonged to the other tenant’s boyfriend.
The tenant also confirmed that the other tenant’s boyfriend removed the smoke alarms. It was the smell of smoke that alerted the landlord to have the premises tested.
Taken together I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the tenant’s boyfriend at the premises with the tenants’ consent, used methamphetamine causing the high levels of contamination.
The tenants are therefore liable or the remediation costs.
The landlord withdrew claims for outside rubbish removal ($358.34) and new window seals/roof space rubbish removal ($357.48)
The amount ordered for the cost of methamphetamine remediation is proved. Exemplary damages
Exemplary damages are designed to punish and to deter. They are awarded at the Tribunal’s discretion when one party has proved that the other party has committed an unlawful act. If that is proven, and before the Tribunal can award exemplary damages, it must take account of the factors set out in section 109 RTA. Those factors are: •The intention of the person; •The effect of the unlawful act; •The interests of the party against whom the unlawful act was committed; and •The public interest.
Section 40(2)(b) RTA provides that a tenant shall not use the premises, or permit the premises to be used, for any unlawful purpose.
Methamphetamine is classified as a Class A drug under Schedule 1 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975. Possession or use of methamphetamine is an offence under section 7 of that Act.
Section 40(3A)(c) RTA provides that using the premises or permitting the premises to be used for any unlawful propose is an unlawful act. The Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to $1,800.00 for this unlawful act – see Schedule 1A RTA.
I am satisfied that the section 109 RTA criteria are met in this case. The use of methamphetamine (or allowing its use) is an intentional act; it was against the landlord’s interests and had a detrimental financial effect on the landlord; and it is against the public interest.
I award the landlord exemplary damages of $600.00. Result
The bond will be paid to the landlord. After the deduction of the bond the tenants will pay the landlord $7,782.87. Name suppression.
The landlord did not seek name suppression. The tenant sought name suppression. I make no order for name suppression as the tenants’ defence is unsuccessful 1 .

Tenancy Tribunal case 5289819 — Exemplary damages at 62 Quartz Drive, Rolleston, Rolleston 7614

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5289819 — Exemplary damages at 62 Quartz Drive, Rolleston, Rolleston 7614

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

Property management

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions