What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5381328 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 5381328?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Holes In Walls: $899.31 awarded to landlord; Kitchen Vinyl: $914.13 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $260.05 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $140.97 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $678.81 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $843.32 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $703.14 awarded to landlord; Rent Credit: $92.05 awarded to tenant; Replace Curtains - Depreciated 75: $903.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $502.68 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $2,136.39 awarded to landlord; Tint Removal: $264.48 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5381328?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5381328?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13344481-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5381328 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 5381328?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Holes In Walls: $899.31 awarded to landlord; Kitchen Vinyl: $914.13 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $260.05 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $140.97 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $678.81 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $843.32 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $703.14 awarded to landlord; Rent Credit: $92.05 awarded to tenant; Replace Curtains - Depreciated 75: $903.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $502.68 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $2,136.39 awarded to landlord; Tint Removal: $264.48 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5381328?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5381328?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13344481-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Tawa, Wellington Tenancy Tribunal Case 5381328 — Property damage

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5381328 — net $8,182.23 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rubbish removal: Interior	$2,136.39		Rubbish removal: Interior
Lawns and Garden work	$260.05		Lawns and Garden work
Rubbish removal: Exterior	$502.68		Rubbish removal: Exterior
Replace carpets and vinyl - depreciated 4.5/10	$914.13		Replace carpets and vinyl - depreciated 4.5/10
Cupboard repairs	$140.97		Cupboard repairs
Tint removal	$264.48		Tint removal
Holes in walls	$899.31		Holes in walls
Door and jamb and latch repair	$678.81		Door and jamb and latch repair
Window repairs	$843.32		Window repairs
Damage quantified during the tenancy	$703.14		Damage quantified during the tenancy
Replace curtains - depreciated 75	$903.00		Replace curtains - depreciated 75
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00		Filing fee reimbursement
Rent credit		$92.05	Rent credit
Total award	$8,274.28	$92.05
Net award	$8,182.23
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$8,182.23

Only the landlord attended the hearing.

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

The rent was in credit at the end of the tenancy. The credit has been applied in the order.

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 did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove a considerable amount of rubbish. Lawns and gardens were overgrown.

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 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. In this case the landlord’s excess is $25,000.00.

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. There was damage to doors and walls, cabinets, window glass, carpets and curtains. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. Apart from the window glass, all other damage is intentional in that the tenant has allowed a situation to continue, knowing that damage is a certainty.

The amounts ordered are proved.

I have taken into account betterment and depreciation. 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, I have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.

I have given the carpets a life of 10 years. The tenant lived at the property for four and a half years before the carpets needed to be replaced. Because the age of the carpet was not known, I have reduced the life of the carpet from 12 years to 10 years. I am satisfied that the carpet was in good condition at the start of the tenancy.

I have given the curtains a life of 8 years. The condition of the curtains at the start of the tenancy is not known. I have allowed the loss of 2 years for the curtains. The amount ordered is a quarter of the replacement cost.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5381328 — net $8,182.23 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rubbish removal: Interior	$2,136.39		Rubbish removal: Interior
Lawns and Garden work	$260.05		Lawns and Garden work
Rubbish removal: Exterior	$502.68		Rubbish removal: Exterior
Replace carpets and vinyl - depreciated 4.5/10	$914.13		Replace carpets and vinyl - depreciated 4.5/10
Cupboard repairs	$140.97		Cupboard repairs
Tint removal	$264.48		Tint removal
Holes in walls	$899.31		Holes in walls
Door and jamb and latch repair	$678.81		Door and jamb and latch repair
Window repairs	$843.32		Window repairs
Damage quantified during the tenancy	$703.14		Damage quantified during the tenancy
Replace curtains - depreciated 75	$903.00		Replace curtains - depreciated 75
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00		Filing fee reimbursement
Rent credit		$92.05	Rent credit
Total award	$8,274.28	$92.05
Net award	$8,182.23
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$8,182.23

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
Shiloh Shahn-Tyahna Katene must pay the landlord $8,182.23 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

Only the landlord attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Rent
The rent was in credit at the end of the tenancy. The credit has been applied in the order.

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 did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove a considerable amount of rubbish. Lawns and gardens were overgrown.
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 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. In this case the landlord’s excess is $25,000.00.
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. There was damage to doors and walls, cabinets, window glass, carpets and curtains. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. Apart from the window glass, all other damage is intentional in that the tenant has allowed a situation to continue, knowing that damage is a certainty.
The amounts ordered are proved.
I have taken into account betterment and depreciation. 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, I have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.
I have given the carpets a life of 10 years. The tenant lived at the property for four and a half years before the carpets needed to be replaced. Because the age of the carpet was not known, I have reduced the life of the carpet from 12 years to 10 years. I am satisfied that the carpet was in good condition at the start of the tenancy.
I have given the curtains a life of 8 years. The condition of the curtains at the start of the tenancy is not known. I have allowed the loss of 2 years for the curtains. The amount ordered is a quarter of the replacement cost.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5381328 — Property damage in Tawa, Wellington

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5381328 — Property damage in Tawa, Wellington

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

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

Frequently asked questions