What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5405308 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 5405308?

Cleaning: $701.50 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $966.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $470.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5405308?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5405308?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13284676-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5405308 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 5405308?

Cleaning: $701.50 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $966.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $470.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5405308?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5405308?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13284676-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5405308 — Cleanliness

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5405308 — net $2,165.50 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning: and carpet cleaning	$701.50	Cleaning: and carpet cleaning
Lawns and Garden work	$966.00	Lawns and Garden work
Repairs	$470.00	Repairs
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,165.50
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,165.50

The landlord attended the remote hearing.

The tenant did not attend the hearing. The Tribunal may hear matters in the absence of a party where satisfied that notice of the hearing has been given. I am satisfied that notice of the hearing was given to the tenant.

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. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.

The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The landlord provided photos of the premises at the end of the tenancy. The photos clearly show that the premises had not been left reasonably clean and tidy. The landlord provided an invoice for cleaning and spot carpet cleaning of $701.50.

The landlord had to replace four light bulbs.

The lawns and gardens had not been left reasonably clean and tidy and substantial amounts of rubbish was required to be removed. The gate also required repair. The landlord provided photos of these items and an invoice for $966.00.

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 • The door chain was damaged. • A door stopper was damaged. • Paint work was damaged in the toilet. • The curtains had to be re hung. • Two windowsills required further painting to repair damage. • Holes in both the laundry and bathroom wall were patched and repainted. • The landlord also sought compensation for damage to a stove knob. I consider that damage to be fair wear and tear and that part of the claim is dismissed.

The other damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The landlord provided an invoice totalling $483.00. I have reduced that sum to $470 to take into account the stove claim.

The amounts ordered are proved.

As Rempstone Property Management Limited As Agent For Hanwen Zhang has substantially succeeded with the claim I have ordered the tenant to reimburse the filing fee.

I order suppression of the tenant’s name and details for the reasons given by the Tribunal in TT 5301828.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5405308 — net $2,165.50 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning: and carpet cleaning	$701.50	Cleaning: and carpet cleaning
Lawns and Garden work	$966.00	Lawns and Garden work
Repairs	$470.00	Repairs
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,165.50
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,165.50

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant’s name and identifying details.
[The tenant/s] must pay Rempstone Property Management Limited As Agent For Hanwen Zhang $2,165.50 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the remote hearing.
The tenant did not attend the hearing. The Tribunal may hear matters in the absence of a party where satisfied that notice of the hearing has been given. I am satisfied that notice of the hearing was given to the tenant.
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. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The landlord provided photos of the premises at the end of the tenancy. The photos clearly show that the premises had not been left reasonably clean and tidy. The landlord provided an invoice for cleaning and spot carpet cleaning of $701.50.
The landlord had to replace four light bulbs.
The lawns and gardens had not been left reasonably clean and tidy and substantial amounts of rubbish was required to be removed. The gate also required repair. The landlord provided photos of these items and an invoice for $966.00.
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 • The door chain was damaged. • A door stopper was damaged. • Paint work was damaged in the toilet. • The curtains had to be re hung. • Two windowsills required further painting to repair damage. • Holes in both the laundry and bathroom wall were patched and repainted. • The landlord also sought compensation for damage to a stove knob. I consider that damage to be fair wear and tear and that part of the claim is dismissed.
The other damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord provided an invoice totalling $483.00. I have reduced that sum to $470 to take into account the stove claim.
The amounts ordered are proved.
As Rempstone Property Management Limited As Agent For Hanwen Zhang has substantially succeeded with the claim I have ordered the tenant to reimburse the filing fee.
I order suppression of the tenant’s name and details for the reasons given by the Tribunal in TT 5301828.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5405308 — Cleanliness

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5405308 — Cleanliness

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

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