What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5363552 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s], [The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] must pay Team Group Rentals

How much money was awarded in case 5363552?

Cleaning: $465.75 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $189.75 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $293.25 awarded to landlord; Smoke Alarms: $268.53 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,171.26 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $235.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $521.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5363552?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Property damage, Smoke alarms.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5363552?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13158263-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5363552 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s], [The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] must pay Team Group Rentals

How much money was awarded in case 5363552?

Cleaning: $465.75 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $189.75 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $293.25 awarded to landlord; Smoke Alarms: $268.53 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,171.26 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $235.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $521.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5363552?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Property damage, Smoke alarms.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5363552?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13158263-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

7 The Bollard, Whitby, Porirua 5024 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5363552 — Cleanliness

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5363552 — net $3,172.54 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rubbish removal: Disposal of rubbish from 2 recycling bins	$235.00	Rubbish removal: Disposal of rubbish from 2 recycling bins
Rubbish removal: Furniture removal	$521.00	Rubbish removal: Furniture removal
Rubbish removal	$1,171.26	Rubbish removal
Lawns and Garden work	$189.75	Lawns and Garden work
Lock/key replacement	$293.25	Lock/key replacement
Cleaning	$465.75	Cleaning
Repairs: to wall, front gate and smoke alarm replacement	$268.53	Repairs: to wall, front gate and smoke alarm replacement
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,172.54
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,172.54

The landlord attended the hearing via remote video conference. The tenants did not join the hearing via the video or telephone link as instructed in the notice of hearing. The hearing continued in their absence.

The landlord has applied for compensation 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 tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.

The tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.

The landlord provided a comprehensive exit inspection report with detailed photographs. They also provided detailed paid invoices in support of all claims.

The tenants left behind a significant amount of household items which had to be disposed of. There was also significant rubbish left behind, inside the house, including rubbish left in two recycling bins. The premises were left in an unsatisfactory state and needed extensive cleaning. The garden and lawns also required tidying.

The tenants did not return all of the keys.

The following chattels were missing at the end of the tenancy: smoke alarm. The landlord claims that one of the smoke alarms had been removed which needed replacing.

Having carefully considered the landlord’s evidence filed in support of their vacated compensation claims I am satisfied that the tenants breached their obligations at the end of the tenancy. I also find that the amounts claimed are reasonable based on the evidence filed by the landlord.

The amounts ordered are proved.

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.

Where the damage is careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.

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) 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) 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) 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) 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.

The following damage was caused during the tenancy: damage to wall and front gate. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The landlord provided evidence in the form of entry and exit inspection photographs. The evidence clearly shows damage to wallpaper. The landlord also claims that the front gate was damaged and required repair.

The amount ordered is proved.

Because Team Group Rentals Limited As The Agent For Rochelle Ellison And [The landlord/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5363552 — net $3,172.54 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rubbish removal: Disposal of rubbish from 2 recycling bins	$235.00	Rubbish removal: Disposal of rubbish from 2 recycling bins
Rubbish removal: Furniture removal	$521.00	Rubbish removal: Furniture removal
Rubbish removal	$1,171.26	Rubbish removal
Lawns and Garden work	$189.75	Lawns and Garden work
Lock/key replacement	$293.25	Lock/key replacement
Cleaning	$465.75	Cleaning
Repairs: to wall, front gate and smoke alarm replacement	$268.53	Repairs: to wall, front gate and smoke alarm replacement
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,172.54
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,172.54

Order

[The tenant/s], [The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] must pay Team Group Rentals Limited As The Agent For Rochelle Ellison And [The landlord/s] $3,172.54 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing via remote video conference. The tenants did not join the hearing via the video or telephone link as instructed in the notice of hearing. The hearing continued in their absence.
The landlord has applied for compensation 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 tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
The landlord provided a comprehensive exit inspection report with detailed photographs. They also provided detailed paid invoices in support of all claims.
The tenants left behind a significant amount of household items which had to be disposed of. There was also significant rubbish left behind, inside the house, including rubbish left in two recycling bins. The premises were left in an unsatisfactory state and needed extensive cleaning. The garden and lawns also required tidying.
The tenants did not return all of the keys.
The following chattels were missing at the end of the tenancy: smoke alarm. The landlord claims that one of the smoke alarms had been removed which needed replacing.
Having carefully considered the landlord’s evidence filed in support of their vacated compensation claims I am satisfied that the tenants breached their obligations at the end of the tenancy. I also find that the amounts claimed are reasonable based on the evidence filed by the landlord.
The amounts ordered are proved.

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.
Where the damage is careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.
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) 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) 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) 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) 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.
The following damage was caused during the tenancy: damage to wall and front gate. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord provided evidence in the form of entry and exit inspection photographs. The evidence clearly shows damage to wallpaper. The landlord also claims that the front gate was damaged and required repair.
The amount ordered is proved.
Because Team Group Rentals Limited As The Agent For Rochelle Ellison And [The landlord/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5363552 — Cleanliness at 7 The Bollard, Whitby, Porirua 5024

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5363552 — Cleanliness at 7 The Bollard, Whitby, Porirua 5024

At a glance

Award balance

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions