What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5425168?

The tribunal order states: Ema Tutonu must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities $3,381.95

How much money was awarded in case 5425168?

Cleaning: $692.75 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $104.26 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $165.86 awarded to landlord; Hole In Wall: $40.35 awarded to landlord; Replace Carpet: $654.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Carpet On Stairs: $331.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Towel Rail: $49.97 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $358.50 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $985.26 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5425168?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5425168?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13433769-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5425168?

The tribunal order states: Ema Tutonu must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities $3,381.95

How much money was awarded in case 5425168?

Cleaning: $692.75 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $104.26 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $165.86 awarded to landlord; Hole In Wall: $40.35 awarded to landlord; Replace Carpet: $654.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Carpet On Stairs: $331.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Towel Rail: $49.97 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $358.50 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $985.26 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5425168?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5425168?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13433769-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

11B Pinotage Place, Huapai, Kumeu 0810 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5425168 — Property damage

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5425168 — net $3,381.95 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning: House	$692.75	5. The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
Cleaning: Stove and oven	$165.86	5. The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
Cleaning: Kitchen cupboards	$104.26	5. The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
Rubbish removal: Exterior	$358.50	Rubbish removal: Exterior
Rubbish removal: Interior	$985.26	Rubbish removal: Interior
Repairs: Hole in wall	$40.35	Repairs: Hole in wall
Repairs: Replace towel rail	$49.97	Repairs: Replace towel rail
Repairs: Replace carpet	$654.00	Repairs: Replace carpet
Repairs: Replace carpet on stairs	$331.00	Repairs: Replace carpet on stairs
Net award	$3,381.95
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,381.95

The landlord attended the remote hearing.

The tenant did not attend the hearing. Telephone calls were made to the tenant on the number provided at the allocated hearing time. The calls could not be connected. I am satisfied that notice of the hearing was provided to the tenant.

The landlord has applied for compensation 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.

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 showing the general condition of the premises. Cleaning and rubbish removal was required to bring the premises to a reasonably clean and tidy standard. The landlord provided a breakdown of the costs. The claim is reasonable and is proven.

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: • Carpet throughout the house was damaged and needed to be replaced. The landlord provided photos of the damage and a breakdown of the costs. • A hole had been made in the bathroom wall. • A towel rail had been removed. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

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.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5425168 — net $3,381.95 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning: House	$692.75	5. The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
Cleaning: Stove and oven	$165.86	5. The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
Cleaning: Kitchen cupboards	$104.26	5. The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
Rubbish removal: Exterior	$358.50	Rubbish removal: Exterior
Rubbish removal: Interior	$985.26	Rubbish removal: Interior
Repairs: Hole in wall	$40.35	Repairs: Hole in wall
Repairs: Replace towel rail	$49.97	Repairs: Replace towel rail
Repairs: Replace carpet	$654.00	Repairs: Replace carpet
Repairs: Replace carpet on stairs	$331.00	Repairs: Replace carpet on stairs
Net award	$3,381.95
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,381.95

Order

Ema Tutonu must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities $3,381.95 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the remote hearing.
The tenant did not attend the hearing. Telephone calls were made to the tenant on the number provided at the allocated hearing time. The calls could not be connected. I am satisfied that notice of the hearing was provided to the tenant.
The landlord has applied for compensation 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.
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 showing the general condition of the premises. Cleaning and rubbish removal was required to bring the premises to a reasonably clean and tidy standard. The landlord provided a breakdown of the costs. The claim is reasonable and is proven.

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: • Carpet throughout the house was damaged and needed to be replaced. The landlord provided photos of the damage and a breakdown of the costs. • A hole had been made in the bathroom wall. • A towel rail had been removed. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
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.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5425168 — Property damage at 11B Pinotage Place, Huapai, Kumeu 0810

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5425168 — Property damage at 11B Pinotage Place, Huapai, Kumeu 0810

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