What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5303240 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenant is to pay the landlord $678.00 being $650.00 in compensation and

How much money was awarded in case 5303240?

1. The Tenant Is To Pay The Landlord: $678.00 awarded to landlord; Being: $650.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5303240?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5303240?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12402020-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5303240 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenant is to pay the landlord $678.00 being $650.00 in compensation and

How much money was awarded in case 5303240?

1. The Tenant Is To Pay The Landlord: $678.00 awarded to landlord; Being: $650.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5303240?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5303240?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12402020-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 1, 73 Clarence Cox Crescent, Pirimai, Napier 4112 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5303240 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5303240. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
1. The tenant is to pay the landlord	$678.00	1. The tenant is to pay the landlord
being	$650.00	being
Bond	$885.50

The tenant is to pay the landlord $678.00 being $650.00 in compensation and $28.00 in reimbursement of the filing fee.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $885.50 (3541091-012) immediately apportioned as follows: Bay Asset Management Limited T/[The landlord/s]: $678.00 [The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s]: $207.50

Reasons

Both parties attended the video hearing. Background

The parties agreed that the tenant carelessly caused a small amount of smoke damage to the ceiling of the living room and that the tenant tried to repair the damage by painting the affected area.

The landlord provided photographic evidence that the tenant’s painting was not completed in a tradesperson-like manner and the paint used by the tenant did not match the colour of the ceiling.

The tenant objected to paying the invoice received for the painting because they had not seen a quotation or consented to the works. They also believe that they should not be responsible for painting the whole ceiling which they believe was done to improve the property prior to its sale. Discussion and decision

Having caused the damage to the ceiling, the tenant is responsible for its repair in a good and tradesman-like manner. The landlord is entitled to arrange the repair without reference to the tenant. What is important is whether the amount charged is fair and reasonable. In this case that requires a consideration of whether the whole ceiling required repainting, the amount of the invoice was reasonable and whether the landlord has been left with a ceiling in better condition than it would have been without the painting.

On the evidence before the Tribunal it has determined: a. The smoke damage required remediation. b. The painting done by the tenant was not of a sufficient standard to have repaired the damage. It was visible and unsightly. The repair had not been completed satisfactorily on an objective basis. c. It was therefore necessary for the landlord to paint the whole ceiling so that the area of damage was properly repaired. d. The amount of the landlord’s contractor’s invoice was fair and reasonable based on invoices which the Tribunal sees on a regular basis for work of this type. e. The landlord has had the benefit of having the whole ceiling repainted and therefore has received some benefit or betterment.

It is therefore reasonable to deduct a modest amount from the total claimed by the landlord to represent this betterment and the sum of $650.00 is awarded to the landlord in compensation for the required repair. Filing fee

Because Bay Asset Management Limited T/[The landlord/s] has substantially succeeded with its claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5303240. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
1. The tenant is to pay the landlord	$678.00	1. The tenant is to pay the landlord
being	$650.00	being
Bond	$885.50

The tenant is to pay the landlord $678.00 being $650.00 in compensation and $28.00 in reimbursement of the filing fee.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $885.50 (3541091-012) immediately apportioned as follows: Bay Asset Management Limited T/[The landlord/s]: $678.00 [The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s]: $207.50

Reasons

Both parties attended the video hearing. Background

The parties agreed that the tenant carelessly caused a small amount of smoke damage to the ceiling of the living room and that the tenant tried to repair the damage by painting the affected area.

The landlord provided photographic evidence that the tenant’s painting was not completed in a tradesperson-like manner and the paint used by the tenant did not match the colour of the ceiling.

Because Bay Asset Management Limited T/[The landlord/s] has substantially succeeded with its claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5303240 — Property damage at Unit/Flat 1, 73 Clarence Cox Crescent, Pirimai, Napier 4112

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5303240 — Property damage at Unit/Flat 1, 73 Clarence Cox Crescent, Pirimai, Napier 4112

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions