What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5355650 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 5355650?

Cleaning: $120.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $259.28 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $169.05 awarded to landlord; Replace Heat Pump Remote: $28.75 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5355650?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5355650?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12879667-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5355650 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 5355650?

Cleaning: $120.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $259.28 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $169.05 awarded to landlord; Replace Heat Pump Remote: $28.75 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5355650?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5355650?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12879667-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5355650 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5355650 — 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 5355650. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Lock/key replacement	$259.28	Lock/key replacement
Cleaning	$120.00	Cleaning
Window repairs	$169.05	Window repairs
Replace heat pump remote	$28.75	Replace heat pump remote
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement

Claims and awards for application 5355650. Verify on MoJ.

Lock/key replacement

Amount: $259.28
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lock/key replacement

Cleaning

Amount: $120.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning

Window repairs

Amount: $169.05
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Window repairs

Replace heat pump remote

Amount: $28.75
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Replace heat pump remote

Filing fee reimbursement

Amount: $28.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Filing fee reimbursement

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Filing Fee Property damage

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name and identifying details.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,520.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned based on the table below:

Reasons

Only the landlord attended the hearing, which was held by video conference. The tenant did not join the conference and so I placed two calls to the mobile number provided for her in the application and as confirmed on her latest tenancy agreement. Both calls went immediately to voicemail.
I am satisfied that the tenant has been served with the lanldord’s application in accordance with the service provisions of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 and has been sent a notice of hearing notifying her of the hearing today, and so the hearing proceeded in the tenant’s absence.
The landlord has applied compensation for replacing locks ($259.28), cleaning ($420.00), repair of damage to walls, doors and painting ($3,697.25), missing heat pump remote replacement ($28.75) and repair of a broken window ($169.05), refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of 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) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord said that the tenant did not leave the property reasonably clean and tidy, did not return the keys and did not leave the heat pump remote behind for the next tenant.
The landlord provided both entry and exit inspection photos showing the heat pump remote present and the start and missing at the end of the tenancy, and photos of keys provided at the start and the locks being changed at the end of the tenancy.
The landlord provided an invoice for both the heat pump ($28.75_ and the locks ($259.28).
These claims are proved.
Tenants do not need to leave the tenancy property spotless and ready for a new tenant to move into. They only need to leave it “reasonably clean and tidy”.
Having reviewed the photos I consider that the tenant left the property fairly close to being reasonably clean and tidy, particularly as the tenancy property was fairly worn. However the interior of the oven required some additional cleaning, the windowsills needed wiping down and various items have been left behind in the kitchen cupboards. I consider that an award of $120.00 is a fair proportion of the cleaning invoice (submitted in evidence in the amount of $420.00) to get the property to the reasonably clean and tidy standard. It is usual for landlords to do additional cleaning before a new tenant moves in.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

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 RTA.
The landlord said that a window in the front door was broken and had to be repaired at a cost of $169.05 as proved by invoice. I was able to review the entry and exit inspection photos and find that the landlord has proven that the window was broken (cracked) during the tenancy.
This claim is proved.
The landlord also claimed the amount of $3,697.25 for repairing damage to walls and doors and plastering/painting. However on review of the exit inspection photos I was unable to see any damage that was not present in the entry inspection photos (apart from some additional wear and tear).
I am not satisfied that the landlord has proved that this damage occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear.
The claim for damage to doors/walls is therefore dismissed. Filing fee and name suppression
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.
The landlord sought an order for name suppression as the substantially successful party pursuant to section 95A RTA and I order accordingly (noting that there are no public interest considerations that would make suppression inappropriate in this case).

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 5355650. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Lock/key replacement	$259.28	Lock/key replacement
Cleaning	$120.00	Cleaning
Window repairs	$169.05	Window repairs
Replace heat pump remote	$28.75	Replace heat pump remote
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement

Claims and awards for application 5355650. Verify on MoJ.

Lock/key replacement

Amount: $259.28
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lock/key replacement

Cleaning

Amount: $120.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning

Window repairs

Amount: $169.05
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Window repairs

Replace heat pump remote

Amount: $28.75
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Replace heat pump remote

Filing fee reimbursement

Amount: $28.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Filing fee reimbursement

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Filing Fee Property damage

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name and identifying details.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,520.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned based on the table below:

Reasons

Only the landlord attended the hearing, which was held by video conference. The tenant did not join the conference and so I placed two calls to the mobile number provided for her in the application and as confirmed on her latest tenancy agreement. Both calls went immediately to voicemail.
I am satisfied that the tenant has been served with the lanldord’s application in accordance with the service provisions of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 and has been sent a notice of hearing notifying her of the hearing today, and so the hearing proceeded in the tenant’s absence.
The landlord has applied compensation for replacing locks ($259.28), cleaning ($420.00), repair of damage to walls, doors and painting ($3,697.25), missing heat pump remote replacement ($28.75) and repair of a broken window ($169.05), refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of 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) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord said that the tenant did not leave the property reasonably clean and tidy, did not return the keys and did not leave the heat pump remote behind for the next tenant.
The landlord provided both entry and exit inspection photos showing the heat pump remote present and the start and missing at the end of the tenancy, and photos of keys provided at the start and the locks being changed at the end of the tenancy.
The landlord provided an invoice for both the heat pump ($28.75_ and the locks ($259.28).
These claims are proved.
Tenants do not need to leave the tenancy property spotless and ready for a new tenant to move into. They only need to leave it “reasonably clean and tidy”.
Having reviewed the photos I consider that the tenant left the property fairly close to being reasonably clean and tidy, particularly as the tenancy property was fairly worn. However the interior of the oven required some additional cleaning, the windowsills needed wiping down and various items have been left behind in the kitchen cupboards. I consider that an award of $120.00 is a fair proportion of the cleaning invoice (submitted in evidence in the amount of $420.00) to get the property to the reasonably clean and tidy standard. It is usual for landlords to do additional cleaning before a new tenant moves in.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

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 RTA.
The landlord said that a window in the front door was broken and had to be repaired at a cost of $169.05 as proved by invoice. I was able to review the entry and exit inspection photos and find that the landlord has proven that the window was broken (cracked) during the tenancy.
This claim is proved.
The landlord also claimed the amount of $3,697.25 for repairing damage to walls and doors and plastering/painting. However on review of the exit inspection photos I was unable to see any damage that was not present in the entry inspection photos (apart from some additional wear and tear).
I am not satisfied that the landlord has proved that this damage occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear.
The claim for damage to doors/walls is therefore dismissed. Filing fee and name suppression
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.
The landlord sought an order for name suppression as the substantially successful party pursuant to section 95A RTA and I order accordingly (noting that there are no public interest considerations that would make suppression inappropriate in this case).

Tenancy Tribunal case 5355650 — Property damage

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5355650 — Property damage

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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