What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5354102?

The tribunal order states: Dyella Edwards must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities $6,637.83

How much money was awarded in case 5354102?

Cleaning: $692.75 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $41.04 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $2,151.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $3,941.04 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5354102?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5354102?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13112666-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5354102?

The tribunal order states: Dyella Edwards must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities $6,637.83

How much money was awarded in case 5354102?

Cleaning: $692.75 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $41.04 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $2,151.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $3,941.04 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5354102?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5354102?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13112666-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

3A Tapper Crescent, Tikipunga, Whangarei 0112 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5354102 — Cleanliness

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5354102 — net $6,637.83 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning	$692.75	Cleaning
Rubbish removal: interior	$3,941.04	Rubbish removal: interior
Rubbish removal: exterior	$2,151.00	Rubbish removal: exterior
Repairs to walls	$41.04	Repairs to walls
Net award	$6,637.83
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$6,637.83

Order

Dyella Edwards must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities $6,637.83 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $188.00 (3435276-002) to Kāinga Ora– Homes and Communities immediately.

Reasons

Only the landlord, represented by Mr van Gent, attended the hearing, which was conducted by videoconference. The tenant did not join the video meeting at the scheduled time, either by video or telephone. The start of the hearing was delayed by 10 minutes, but the tenant still did not attend. As the tenant has been notified, the hearing proceeded.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, and payment from the bond following the end of the tenancy. The landlord has since withdrawn the claim for rent arrears and compensation for costs arising during 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) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the RTA).
The landlord seeks cleaning and rubbish removal costs. The landlord has produced inspection reports with photographic evidence showing the condition of the premises at the start of the tenancy, and when the tenancy ended. This evidence establishes that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish.
The landlord states all rooms needed extensive cleaning, especially in the kitchen.
In terms of the rubbish removal costs, which are substantial, the landlord’s evidence is that there were large bulky items left inside and outside the premises, including furniture and large appliances. This is a five bedroom house. The landlord’s maintenance work order was provided, showing that the volume of the interior rubbish totalled 24 cubic metres. The exterior rubbish came to 12 cubic metres. The landlord has explained that the charges include labour and tipping fees.
Being satisfied that the landlord has established its claim for cleaning and rubbish removal costs, the amounts sought are ordered above. Compensation for tenant damage General principles regarding responsibility for damage
The landlord seeks compensation for tenant damage. To be successful in such claims, 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 of the RTA.
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) of the 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) of the 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) of the 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) of the 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.
When determining the quantum of compensation, betterment and depreciation must be taken into account. Applying the principle of betterment, 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, the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan must be considered. The landlord’s claim for tenant damage
On the basis of the landlord’s evidence, I am satisfied that the following damage was caused during the tenancy: • Bathroom wall: the wall had a sizeable hole, and had to be repaired. The landlord only seeks a portion of this cost ($41.04), for plastering.
The above damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The amounts ordered are proved.
In determining the quantum of compensation, betterment and depreciation has been taken into account. Filing fee and name suppression
While successful, the landlord does not seek the filing fee.
The landlord has requested that the tenant’s name be suppressed. Having considered the reasons given, and noting the interests of the parties and the public interest, I am not persuaded it is warranted, and therefore, decline to suppress the tenant’s name. Name suppression for the landlord is not sought.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5354102 — net $6,637.83 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning	$692.75	Cleaning
Rubbish removal: interior	$3,941.04	Rubbish removal: interior
Rubbish removal: exterior	$2,151.00	Rubbish removal: exterior
Repairs to walls	$41.04	Repairs to walls
Net award	$6,637.83
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$6,637.83

Order

Dyella Edwards must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities $6,637.83 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $188.00 (3435276-002) to Kāinga Ora– Homes and Communities immediately.

Reasons

Only the landlord, represented by Mr van Gent, attended the hearing, which was conducted by videoconference. The tenant did not join the video meeting at the scheduled time, either by video or telephone. The start of the hearing was delayed by 10 minutes, but the tenant still did not attend. As the tenant has been notified, the hearing proceeded.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, and payment from the bond following the end of the tenancy. The landlord has since withdrawn the claim for rent arrears and compensation for costs arising during 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) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the RTA).
The landlord seeks cleaning and rubbish removal costs. The landlord has produced inspection reports with photographic evidence showing the condition of the premises at the start of the tenancy, and when the tenancy ended. This evidence establishes that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish.
The landlord states all rooms needed extensive cleaning, especially in the kitchen.
In terms of the rubbish removal costs, which are substantial, the landlord’s evidence is that there were large bulky items left inside and outside the premises, including furniture and large appliances. This is a five bedroom house. The landlord’s maintenance work order was provided, showing that the volume of the interior rubbish totalled 24 cubic metres. The exterior rubbish came to 12 cubic metres. The landlord has explained that the charges include labour and tipping fees.
Being satisfied that the landlord has established its claim for cleaning and rubbish removal costs, the amounts sought are ordered above. Compensation for tenant damage General principles regarding responsibility for damage
The landlord seeks compensation for tenant damage. To be successful in such claims, 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 of the RTA.
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) of the 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) of the 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) of the 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) of the 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.
When determining the quantum of compensation, betterment and depreciation must be taken into account. Applying the principle of betterment, 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, the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan must be considered. The landlord’s claim for tenant damage
On the basis of the landlord’s evidence, I am satisfied that the following damage was caused during the tenancy: • Bathroom wall: the wall had a sizeable hole, and had to be repaired. The landlord only seeks a portion of this cost ($41.04), for plastering.
The above damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The amounts ordered are proved.
In determining the quantum of compensation, betterment and depreciation has been taken into account. Filing fee and name suppression
While successful, the landlord does not seek the filing fee.
The landlord has requested that the tenant’s name be suppressed. Having considered the reasons given, and noting the interests of the parties and the public interest, I am not persuaded it is warranted, and therefore, decline to suppress the tenant’s name. Name suppression for the landlord is not sought.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5354102 — Cleanliness at 3A Tapper Crescent, Tikipunga, Whangarei 0112

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5354102 — Cleanliness at 3A Tapper Crescent, Tikipunga, Whangarei 0112

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