How much money was awarded in case 5343916?

Cleaning: $30.00 awarded to landlord; Agreed- Garage: $180.00 awarded to landlord; Agreed- Wall Dents: $215.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5343916?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5343916?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12769473-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5343916?

Cleaning: $30.00 awarded to landlord; Agreed- Garage: $180.00 awarded to landlord; Agreed- Wall Dents: $215.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5343916?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5343916?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12769473-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5343916 — Property damage

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5343916 about?

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

Tenantcheck Insights

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5343916 — net $425.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Repairs: Agreed- wall dents	$215.00	Repairs: Agreed- wall dents
Repairs: Agreed- Garage	$180.00	Repairs: Agreed- Garage
Cleaning: Agreed- Curtain washing	$30.00	Cleaning: Agreed- Curtain washing
Net award	$425.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$425.00

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

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $425.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to Delfino Ventura Colores, Yan Fei Lao and Street Smart Property Management Limited Florence San Jose immediately. The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,655.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The tenant/s] immediately.

This matter is determined as indicated by the orders above, but the landlord is granted a period of 10 working days to file their own claim for the replacement of the oven. If the landlord does not file a claim within that time then this application will be closed.

Any application file by the landlord is to be set down in front of me for a one hour telephone hearing.

Reasons

Both parties attended today’s phone hearing.

The tenant has applied for refund of the bond. The landlord has a claim against the bond but has not filed a counterclaim with Tenancy Services.

Section 22B(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that, where a tenant applies for refund of the bond, and the landlord seeks payment from the bond, the landlord must file an application setting out the details of the counterclaim.

The tenant accepted liability for the following payments to be made from the bond: a. Repair of wall dents - $215.00 b. Repair of holes in garage - $180 c. Cleaning of curtains -$30.00

The main dispute between the parties is over damage to the cooktop. The tenant accepts that shortly after the tenancy started, her daughter dropped something onto the cooktop causing it to chip/crack. She says that she immediately notified the landlord, and he told her to continue to use the cooktop and just to watch it. The tenant says that a few days before the tenancy ended the same owner did another inspection and did not mention the cracked cooktop. She said it was only after the tenancy ended and the owner appointed Ms San Jose as his property manager that the landlord started asking for the cooktop to be replaced.

The owner is seeking the replacement cost of the cooktop. He has not filed a claim for this, or any costs incurred at the end of the tenancy. He accepts that he was first notified of the chip/crack to the cooktop in March 2024 when he conducted a routine inspection. He says that his understanding is that he told the tenant she would be liable for the damage but would wait to see if the problem got worse. He says that he was trying to be kind to the tenants as he did not think that they would have the funds to pay for a new cooktop during the tenancy.

The tenant says that the landlord never told her that the cooktop needed replacement, she says the landlord sent her an email yesterday saying that the replacement cooktop was necessary because of safety concerns. She is upset that if the cooktop was a hazard, as the landlord submits, then she has been cooking on it.

Another complicating factor is that in the original tenancy agreement that was in place at the time the damage occurred the insurance excess was recorded as $550.00 In a later renewal agreement it was stated to be $2500.00. If the tenant carelessly caused the damage, then the maximum amount that can be awarded for the damage is the lesser of 4 weeks rent or the insurance excess or the cost of the stovetop.

As the landlord has not filed a counterclaim for the cooktop, then the bond is refunded to the tenant less the agreed amounts.

As the parties have already discussed at some length the cooktop claim, then I consider the most efficient way to deal with this matter is to require the landlord to file a claim for the cooktop and set that matter down for a hearing with me. This will allow me to carefully consider the evidence from both parties on this issue.

If the landlord does not file a counterclaim within 10 working days then this application will be closed.

As the tenant has been successful with her claim, I grant her name suppression.

I will consider reimbursement of the filing fee with the landlord’s claim.

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5343916 — net $425.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Repairs: Agreed- wall dents	$215.00	Repairs: Agreed- wall dents
Repairs: Agreed- Garage	$180.00	Repairs: Agreed- Garage
Cleaning: Agreed- Curtain washing	$30.00	Cleaning: Agreed- Curtain washing
Net award	$425.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$425.00

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

Any application file by the landlord is to be set down in front of me for a one hour telephone hearing.

Reasons

Both parties attended today’s phone hearing.

The tenant has applied for refund of the bond. The landlord has a claim against the bond but has not filed a counterclaim with Tenancy Services.

The tenant accepted liability for the following payments to be made from the bond: a. Repair of wall dents - $215.00 b. Repair of holes in garage - $180 c. Cleaning of curtains -$30.00

As the landlord has not filed a counterclaim for the cooktop, then the bond is refunded to the tenant less the agreed amounts.

If the landlord does not file a counterclaim within 10 working days then this application will be closed.

As the tenant has been successful with her claim, I grant her name suppression.

I will consider reimbursement of the filing fee with the landlord’s claim.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5343916 — Property damage

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5343916 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions