What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5309301 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 5309301?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $63.25 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $172.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $682.01 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,717.81 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $867.14 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $332.82 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $187.17 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5309301?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5309301?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12839375-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5309301 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 5309301?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $63.25 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $172.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $682.01 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,717.81 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $867.14 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $332.82 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $187.17 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5309301?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5309301?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12839375-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5309301 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5309301 — 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 5309301 — net $1,970.70 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 14.6.24	$867.14	Rent arrears to 14.6.24
Rubbish removal	$187.17	Rubbish removal
Lock/key replacement	$172.50	Lock/key replacement
Lock/key replacement: Swipe tag	$63.25	Lock/key replacement: Swipe tag
Repairs: Damaged door	$332.82	Repairs: Damaged door
Repair and call out fee – Fire alarm	$682.01	Repair and call out fee – Fire alarm
Repair and call out fee – Fire alarm	$1,717.81	Repair and call out fee – Fire alarm
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,970.70
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,970.70

Claims and awards for application 5309301 — net $1,970.70 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears to 14.6.24

Amount: $867.14
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears to 14.6.24

Rubbish removal

Amount: $187.17
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal

Lock/key replacement

Amount: $172.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lock/key replacement

Lock/key replacement: Swipe tag

Amount: $63.25
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lock/key replacement: Swipe tag

Repairs: Damaged door

Amount: $332.82
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Damaged door

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Filing Fee Property damage Rent arrears Rubbish Removal

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the parties names and identifying details.
[The tenant/s] must pay [The landlord/s] $1,970.70 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,080.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.
The balance of the claim is dismissed.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing by video call.
The tenant did not connect to the teams hearing and was telephoned on the phone number provided but the phone call had no dial tone. I am satisfied the tenant was properly served with notice of the hearing. The hearing proceeded in her absence.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, payment of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Relevant legal considerations
The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations That includes a requirement that the applicant, establish their claims on the balance of probabilities. The balance of probabilities means more likely than un-likely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally more than 50% likelihood.
The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely. This obligation carried by the applicant is referred to as the “burden of proof”. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
As noted by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy 1 , in practical terms this means that: ... “[L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.”
The Tribunal may award compensation to a party for losses arising from a proven breach or breaches by the other party of their statutory responsibilities under the RTA. Compensation is generally awarded for actual losses and sometimes for less tangible effects of proven breaches such as a loss of enjoyment of the tenancy and the accompanying stress and anxiety. 1 Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02

How much is owed for rent?

The tenant must pay the rent as and when it is due and payable under the tenancy agreement. 2 The tenancy ended on 14 June 2024.
The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy - $867.14

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

At the end of the tenancy the tenant must remove all his or her goods from the premises, leave the premises (including the land provided with the premises) reasonably clean and tidy, remove all rubbish, return all keys and security devices and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. 3 Rubbish removal:
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. Rubbish removal was required and the amount claimed of $187.17 for the removal of the rubbish is proved and it is ordered Swipe card replacement
The tenant did not return the premises swipe card. The amount claimed of $63.35 is proved with an invoice and oral evidence. Lock replacement
The tenant did not return the keys. The amount ordered of $172.50 is proved with oral evidence and an invoice.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

A tenant must not intentionally or carelessly cause damage or permit any other person to damage the premises. 4 Where a landlord is claiming compensation for damage 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. 2 See section 40 (1)(a) of the RTA. 3 See section 40(1)(e) of the RTA. 4 See s 40 (2)(a) of the RTA.
Tenants are liable for the actions of people at the premises with their permission. 5
Fair wear and tear can be described as damage which might reasonably be expected to naturally occur over time, such as the deterioration or gradual wear occurring with everyday use. 6
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). 7
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). 8 Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. 9
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. 10
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. 11
In assessing a claim for compensation, I must take into account 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 must take into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.
The following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. A door was damaged when the tenant called the emergency services for assistance and the emergency services needed to access the premises. The amount claimed of $332.82 is ordered b. The fire alarm was damaged from tampering. The landlord says the tenant tampered with the fire alarm during the tenancy. I consider the damaged 5 See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA. 6 See Taylor v Webb [1937] 2KB 283 (CA). 7 See section 49B(3)(a) RTA. 8 See section 49B(3)(b) RTA. 9 See section 49B(3A)(a) RTA. 10 See section 49B(1) RTA. 11 See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541. was likely intentional. The landlord seeks reimbursement of the charges raised by the Body Corporate of $682.01 being a call out and repair fee and $1,717.81 for a callout and repair fee. These amounts are ordered.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord says the carpark door was damaged. The amount claimed was $383.57. A body corporate invoice was provided in support of the claim and oral evidence that someone visiting the tenant caused the damage, however the landlord could not refer me to photographs of the damage and in the absence of photographs of the damage I consider the landlord has not proven the claim in respect of the carpark door and it is dismissed. Bond
The bond is to be paid to the landlord immediately to offset the amounts ordered. Filing Fee
As the landlord has succeeded with the claim, I have reimbursed the filing fee of $28. 12 Suppression
Section 95A of the RTA relates to suppression orders. The relevant provisions state: (1)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.... ...(4) The Tribunal may, on the application of any party to proceedings or on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that all or part of the evidence given or the name or any identifying particulars of any witness or party not be published. (5) An order under subsection (4) may be made subject to any conditions that the Tribunal considers appropriate. 12 See section 102 (4) of the RTA.
On my enquiry, the landlord applied for name suppression and as the landlord as been successful in the claim I order name suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
The tenant did not attend the hearing. The landlord applied for name suppression for the tenant on the basis of her personal challenges and that her interests outweigh any public interest in this case. I will allow name suppression for the tenant for these reasons.

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 5309301 — net $1,970.70 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 14.6.24	$867.14	Rent arrears to 14.6.24
Rubbish removal	$187.17	Rubbish removal
Lock/key replacement	$172.50	Lock/key replacement
Lock/key replacement: Swipe tag	$63.25	Lock/key replacement: Swipe tag
Repairs: Damaged door	$332.82	Repairs: Damaged door
Repair and call out fee – Fire alarm	$682.01	Repair and call out fee – Fire alarm
Repair and call out fee – Fire alarm	$1,717.81	Repair and call out fee – Fire alarm
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,970.70
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,970.70

Claims and awards for application 5309301 — net $1,970.70 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears to 14.6.24

Amount: $867.14
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears to 14.6.24

Rubbish removal

Amount: $187.17
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal

Lock/key replacement

Amount: $172.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lock/key replacement

Lock/key replacement: Swipe tag

Amount: $63.25
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lock/key replacement: Swipe tag

Repairs: Damaged door

Amount: $332.82
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Damaged door

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Filing Fee Property damage Rent arrears Rubbish Removal

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the parties names and identifying details.
[The tenant/s] must pay [The landlord/s] $1,970.70 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,080.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.
The balance of the claim is dismissed.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing by video call.
The tenant did not connect to the teams hearing and was telephoned on the phone number provided but the phone call had no dial tone. I am satisfied the tenant was properly served with notice of the hearing. The hearing proceeded in her absence.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, payment of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Relevant legal considerations
The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations That includes a requirement that the applicant, establish their claims on the balance of probabilities. The balance of probabilities means more likely than un-likely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally more than 50% likelihood.
The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely. This obligation carried by the applicant is referred to as the “burden of proof”. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
As noted by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy 1 , in practical terms this means that: ... “[L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.”
The Tribunal may award compensation to a party for losses arising from a proven breach or breaches by the other party of their statutory responsibilities under the RTA. Compensation is generally awarded for actual losses and sometimes for less tangible effects of proven breaches such as a loss of enjoyment of the tenancy and the accompanying stress and anxiety. 1 Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02

How much is owed for rent?

The tenant must pay the rent as and when it is due and payable under the tenancy agreement. 2 The tenancy ended on 14 June 2024.
The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy - $867.14

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

At the end of the tenancy the tenant must remove all his or her goods from the premises, leave the premises (including the land provided with the premises) reasonably clean and tidy, remove all rubbish, return all keys and security devices and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. 3 Rubbish removal:
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. Rubbish removal was required and the amount claimed of $187.17 for the removal of the rubbish is proved and it is ordered Swipe card replacement
The tenant did not return the premises swipe card. The amount claimed of $63.35 is proved with an invoice and oral evidence. Lock replacement
The tenant did not return the keys. The amount ordered of $172.50 is proved with oral evidence and an invoice.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

A tenant must not intentionally or carelessly cause damage or permit any other person to damage the premises. 4 Where a landlord is claiming compensation for damage 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. 2 See section 40 (1)(a) of the RTA. 3 See section 40(1)(e) of the RTA. 4 See s 40 (2)(a) of the RTA.
Tenants are liable for the actions of people at the premises with their permission. 5
Fair wear and tear can be described as damage which might reasonably be expected to naturally occur over time, such as the deterioration or gradual wear occurring with everyday use. 6
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). 7
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). 8 Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. 9
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. 10
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. 11
In assessing a claim for compensation, I must take into account 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 must take into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.
The following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. A door was damaged when the tenant called the emergency services for assistance and the emergency services needed to access the premises. The amount claimed of $332.82 is ordered b. The fire alarm was damaged from tampering. The landlord says the tenant tampered with the fire alarm during the tenancy. I consider the damaged 5 See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA. 6 See Taylor v Webb [1937] 2KB 283 (CA). 7 See section 49B(3)(a) RTA. 8 See section 49B(3)(b) RTA. 9 See section 49B(3A)(a) RTA. 10 See section 49B(1) RTA. 11 See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541. was likely intentional. The landlord seeks reimbursement of the charges raised by the Body Corporate of $682.01 being a call out and repair fee and $1,717.81 for a callout and repair fee. These amounts are ordered.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord says the carpark door was damaged. The amount claimed was $383.57. A body corporate invoice was provided in support of the claim and oral evidence that someone visiting the tenant caused the damage, however the landlord could not refer me to photographs of the damage and in the absence of photographs of the damage I consider the landlord has not proven the claim in respect of the carpark door and it is dismissed. Bond
The bond is to be paid to the landlord immediately to offset the amounts ordered. Filing Fee
As the landlord has succeeded with the claim, I have reimbursed the filing fee of $28. 12 Suppression
Section 95A of the RTA relates to suppression orders. The relevant provisions state: (1)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.... ...(4) The Tribunal may, on the application of any party to proceedings or on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that all or part of the evidence given or the name or any identifying particulars of any witness or party not be published. (5) An order under subsection (4) may be made subject to any conditions that the Tribunal considers appropriate. 12 See section 102 (4) of the RTA.
On my enquiry, the landlord applied for name suppression and as the landlord as been successful in the claim I order name suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
The tenant did not attend the hearing. The landlord applied for name suppression for the tenant on the basis of her personal challenges and that her interests outweigh any public interest in this case. I will allow name suppression for the tenant for these reasons.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5309301 — Property damage

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5309301 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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 rent?

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