What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5297519 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 5297519?

Cleaning: $345.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $451.38 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $522.07 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $287.50 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $77.74 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5297519?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5297519?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12312056-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5297519 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 5297519?

Cleaning: $345.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $451.38 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $522.07 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $287.50 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $77.74 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5297519?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5297519?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12312056-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5297519 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5297519 — Property damage | TenantCheck

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5297519 — net $1,710.69 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rubbish removal	$77.74	Rubbish removal
Cleaning	$451.38	Cleaning
Carpet Cleaning	$345.00	Carpet Cleaning
Repairs: Paint/repair walls, skirting boards/trims, door, and remove scuff marks	$522.07	Repairs: Paint/repair walls, skirting boards/trims, door, and remove scuff marks
Repairs: Remove stickers off bathroom wall and mirror and kitchen wall and repair/ paint	$287.50	Repairs: Remove stickers off bathroom wall and mirror and kitchen wall and repair/ paint
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,710.69
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,710.69

Claims and awards for application 5297519 — net $1,710.69 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rubbish removal

Amount: $77.74
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal

Cleaning

Amount: $451.38
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning

Carpet Cleaning

Amount: $345.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Carpet Cleaning

Repairs: Paint/repair walls, skirting boards/trims, door, and remove scuff marks

Amount: $522.07
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Paint/repair walls, skirting boards/trims, door, and remove scuff marks

Repairs: Remove stickers off bathroom wall and mirror and kitchen wall and repair/ paint

Amount: $287.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Carpet Cleaning Cleanliness Filing Fee Property damage Rubbish Removal

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name and identifying details.
Christina Gina Tomasi must pay [The landlord] $1,710.69 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not.
I am satisfied that the tenant had received proper notice of the hearing time, date and place and chose not to attend.
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 landlord has provided photographic evidence that proves on the balance of probabilities that the tenant did not leave the premise reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
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 careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.
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 has produced evidence of the following damage caused during the tenancy, to surfaces that were new at the start of the tenancy: a. Dog damage to windowsills in bedroom 1 and the lounge, skirting boards/trims and the door that leads to the staircase. This damage consists of scratch marks that needed to be plastered, sanded and painted; b. Damage to the pain on windowsill in bedroom 1 from what appears to be a diffuser; c. Paint damage to skirting boards from LED strip light removal that pulled off paint in bedroom 2; d. Scuff marks and pin holes in the walls of bedroom 2; e. Blue marks on the wall in bedroom 2 from something rubbing on it; f. Heavy damage to the paint on one wall in the master bedroom; g. Scuff marks throughout house on walls and skirting boards/trims; and h. Stickers on the walls in the kitchen, main bathroom that had to be removed and caused damage to the surfaces when they were removed.
The nature of this damage is more than fair wear and tear. The property was in new condition at the start of the tenancy and the photographs of the damage prove this damage is more likely than not to have been the result of the tenants careless acts or omissions. The tenant has not disproved liability for the 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. In calculating depreciation, I have considered the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Reimbursement of filing fee
Section 102(4) of the RTA confirms that applicants that are wholly or substantially successful in proving their claims will have their filing fee reimbursed.
Because the landlord has wholly succeeded with its claim, I must reimburse the filing fee. Name suppression
The landlord applies for non-publication of its name and identifying details.
The Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
The landlord has substantially succeeded in its proceedings. I do not consider publication is in the public interest or justified because of the landlord’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
Non-publication is ordered.

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5297519 — net $1,710.69 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rubbish removal	$77.74	Rubbish removal
Cleaning	$451.38	Cleaning
Carpet Cleaning	$345.00	Carpet Cleaning
Repairs: Paint/repair walls, skirting boards/trims, door, and remove scuff marks	$522.07	Repairs: Paint/repair walls, skirting boards/trims, door, and remove scuff marks
Repairs: Remove stickers off bathroom wall and mirror and kitchen wall and repair/ paint	$287.50	Repairs: Remove stickers off bathroom wall and mirror and kitchen wall and repair/ paint
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,710.69
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,710.69

Claims and awards for application 5297519 — net $1,710.69 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rubbish removal

Amount: $77.74
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal

Cleaning

Amount: $451.38
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning

Carpet Cleaning

Amount: $345.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Carpet Cleaning

Repairs: Paint/repair walls, skirting boards/trims, door, and remove scuff marks

Amount: $522.07
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Paint/repair walls, skirting boards/trims, door, and remove scuff marks

Repairs: Remove stickers off bathroom wall and mirror and kitchen wall and repair/ paint

Amount: $287.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Carpet Cleaning Cleanliness Filing Fee Property damage Rubbish Removal

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name and identifying details.
Christina Gina Tomasi must pay [The landlord] $1,710.69 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not.
I am satisfied that the tenant had received proper notice of the hearing time, date and place and chose not to attend.
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 landlord has provided photographic evidence that proves on the balance of probabilities that the tenant did not leave the premise reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
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 careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.
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 has produced evidence of the following damage caused during the tenancy, to surfaces that were new at the start of the tenancy: a. Dog damage to windowsills in bedroom 1 and the lounge, skirting boards/trims and the door that leads to the staircase. This damage consists of scratch marks that needed to be plastered, sanded and painted; b. Damage to the pain on windowsill in bedroom 1 from what appears to be a diffuser; c. Paint damage to skirting boards from LED strip light removal that pulled off paint in bedroom 2; d. Scuff marks and pin holes in the walls of bedroom 2; e. Blue marks on the wall in bedroom 2 from something rubbing on it; f. Heavy damage to the paint on one wall in the master bedroom; g. Scuff marks throughout house on walls and skirting boards/trims; and h. Stickers on the walls in the kitchen, main bathroom that had to be removed and caused damage to the surfaces when they were removed.
The nature of this damage is more than fair wear and tear. The property was in new condition at the start of the tenancy and the photographs of the damage prove this damage is more likely than not to have been the result of the tenants careless acts or omissions. The tenant has not disproved liability for the 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. In calculating depreciation, I have considered the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Reimbursement of filing fee
Section 102(4) of the RTA confirms that applicants that are wholly or substantially successful in proving their claims will have their filing fee reimbursed.
Because the landlord has wholly succeeded with its claim, I must reimburse the filing fee. Name suppression
The landlord applies for non-publication of its name and identifying details.
The Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
The landlord has substantially succeeded in its proceedings. I do not consider publication is in the public interest or justified because of the landlord’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
Non-publication is ordered.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5297519 — Property damage

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5297519 — Property damage

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