How much money was awarded in case 5342244?

Cleaning: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant; Lawns and Garden Work: $80.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5342244?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5342244?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12697956-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5342244?

Cleaning: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant; Lawns and Garden Work: $80.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5342244?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5342244?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12697956-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5342244 — Cleanliness

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5342244 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 5342244 — net $252.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Cleaning	$200.00		Cleaning
Lawns and Garden work	$80.00		Lawns and Garden work
Filing fee reimbursement		$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Total award	$280.00	$28.00
Net award	$252.00
Bond	$2,080.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$252.00

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

[The tenant/s] to pay Irelands Real Estate Limited As Agent For Thilina Thimira Panagoda $252.00 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,080.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: Irelands Real Estate Limited As Agent For Thilina Thimira Panagoda: $252.00 [The tenant/s]: $1,828.00

Reasons

Both parties attended the video hearing.

The tenant had the assistance of an interpreter.

The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

The tenant has applied for refund of the bond and reimbursement of the filing fee.

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

Landlords are required to provide the premises to the tenant at the start of the tenancy in a reasonable state of cleanliness (see s 45(1)(a) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).

Tenants must keep the premises reasonably clean and tidy during the tenancy, and they must return them in a reasonably clean and tidy state at the end of the tenancy (ss 40(1)(c) and (e)(iii) RTA).

In Ace Property Management v Owens (DC Wellington, CIV-2008-085-14441, 17 December 2008) the District Court said: A tenant’s obligation pursuant to the Act to leave a property in a “reasonably clean and reasonably tidy condition” does not mean that it will necessarily be up to a standard that a landlord may consider for a new tenant. It is a mistake for landlords to confuse those two matters.

The RTA does not require the premises to be provided or returned in a spotless or an immaculate condition. The standard is based on what an average bystander would consider reasonable; not on the subjective opinions of the landlord and tenant. There is no scientific way to determine what is reasonably clean and tidy, and the Tribunal must evaluate the evidence available, and in particular inspection reports and photographs.

The standard will vary according to the age and condition of the premises: the better the premises, the higher the standard. Surfaces that are new and in a good condition will be easier to clean than older and worn surfaces, particularly painted surfaces. Generally, tenants are not required to return premises any cleaner than they were at the start of the tenancy (Westwood v Western, DC Otahuhu, TT 2539/93 and 2540/93, 4 November 1994).

The landlord provided photos of the premises at the commencement of the tenancy and at the end of the tenancy.

The photos show that the interior of the premises were in good condition at the commencement of the tenancy.

The photos provided of the premises at the end of the tenancy show that generally the property had been left in a reasonably clean and tidy condition. I do not consider that the oven and fridge had been left reasonably clean and tidy. The landlord provided an invoice for cleaning of $420.00. Having reviewed the photos, I consider that cleaning costs of $200.00 would have been sufficient to bring the premises to a reasonably clean and tidy condition. Any cleaning carried out after achieving that standard is not cleaning that the tenant is responsible for.

The landlord provided photos of the small exterior gardens taken at the commencement of the tenancy. The photo showed that the weeds were already established in some areas.

The landlord provided photos taken of the same gardens at the end of the tenancy. The weeds now cover a greater area. I note that there was a period of five days between the end of the tenancy and completion of the gardening. The weeds will have inevitably grown during that period.

I have taken into account the fact that there were there was some area of weeds at the commencement of the tenancy and the weed growth post the end of the tenancy in deciding that a reasonable sum for gardening to bring the gardens to a reasonably tidy standard would be $80.00.

As [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim, I have ordered the landlord to reimburse the filing fee.

The tenant applied for name suppression. The tenant has been substantially successful in this hearing. Suppression of the tenant’s name and details is ordered

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5342244 — net $252.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Cleaning	$200.00		Cleaning
Lawns and Garden work	$80.00		Lawns and Garden work
Filing fee reimbursement		$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Total award	$280.00	$28.00
Net award	$252.00
Bond	$2,080.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$252.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant’s name and identifying details.
[The tenant/s] to pay Irelands Real Estate Limited As Agent For Thilina Thimira Panagoda $252.00 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,080.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: Irelands Real Estate Limited As Agent For Thilina Thimira Panagoda: $252.00 [The tenant/s]: $1,828.00

Reasons

Both parties attended the video hearing.
The tenant had the assistance of an interpreter.
The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The tenant has applied for refund of the bond and reimbursement of the filing fee.

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

Landlords are required to provide the premises to the tenant at the start of the tenancy in a reasonable state of cleanliness (see s 45(1)(a) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
Tenants must keep the premises reasonably clean and tidy during the tenancy, and they must return them in a reasonably clean and tidy state at the end of the tenancy (ss 40(1)(c) and (e)(iii) RTA).
In Ace Property Management v Owens (DC Wellington, CIV-2008-085-14441, 17 December 2008) the District Court said: A tenant’s obligation pursuant to the Act to leave a property in a “reasonably clean and reasonably tidy condition” does not mean that it will necessarily be up to a standard that a landlord may consider for a new tenant. It is a mistake for landlords to confuse those two matters.
The RTA does not require the premises to be provided or returned in a spotless or an immaculate condition. The standard is based on what an average bystander would consider reasonable; not on the subjective opinions of the landlord and tenant. There is no scientific way to determine what is reasonably clean and tidy, and the Tribunal must evaluate the evidence available, and in particular inspection reports and photographs.
The standard will vary according to the age and condition of the premises: the better the premises, the higher the standard. Surfaces that are new and in a good condition will be easier to clean than older and worn surfaces, particularly painted surfaces. Generally, tenants are not required to return premises any cleaner than they were at the start of the tenancy (Westwood v Western, DC Otahuhu, TT 2539/93 and 2540/93, 4 November 1994).
The landlord provided photos of the premises at the commencement of the tenancy and at the end of the tenancy.
The photos show that the interior of the premises were in good condition at the commencement of the tenancy.
The photos provided of the premises at the end of the tenancy show that generally the property had been left in a reasonably clean and tidy condition. I do not consider that the oven and fridge had been left reasonably clean and tidy. The landlord provided an invoice for cleaning of $420.00. Having reviewed the photos, I consider that cleaning costs of $200.00 would have been sufficient to bring the premises to a reasonably clean and tidy condition. Any cleaning carried out after achieving that standard is not cleaning that the tenant is responsible for.
The landlord provided photos of the small exterior gardens taken at the commencement of the tenancy. The photo showed that the weeds were already established in some areas.
The landlord provided photos taken of the same gardens at the end of the tenancy. The weeds now cover a greater area. I note that there was a period of five days between the end of the tenancy and completion of the gardening. The weeds will have inevitably grown during that period.
I have taken into account the fact that there were there was some area of weeds at the commencement of the tenancy and the weed growth post the end of the tenancy in deciding that a reasonable sum for gardening to bring the gardens to a reasonably tidy standard would be $80.00.
As [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim, I have ordered the landlord to reimburse the filing fee.
The tenant applied for name suppression. The tenant has been substantially successful in this hearing. Suppression of the tenant’s name and details is ordered

Tenancy Tribunal case 5342244 — Cleanliness

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5342244 — Cleanliness

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

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?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions