What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5448914 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] must pay Shelter Realty Limited As

How much money was awarded in case 5448914?

Agent For Ronee And Anjleen Nand: $201.25 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5448914?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5448914?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13811279-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5448914 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] must pay Shelter Realty Limited As

How much money was awarded in case 5448914?

Agent For Ronee And Anjleen Nand: $201.25 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5448914?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5448914?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13811279-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat A, 18 Coronet Place, Avondale, Auckland 1026 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5448914 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5448914. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Agent For Ronee And Anjleen Nand	$201.25		Agent For Ronee And Anjleen Nand

This dispute relates to a charge of $402.50 for repairing holes caused by the installation of a television wall bracket.

The tenant does not dispute that they are liable for reinstating the wall. What they dispute is the amount claimed. They say they offered to have their own contractor complete the work, who quoted between $100 and $150, but they were unable to do so because the landlord did not confirm the paint colour.

The landlord's position is that they attempted to accommodate the tenant's tradesperson. However, they say the proposed work involved only painting over the repaired areas, which would not have been sufficient. Instead, it was necessary to paint the entire wall to achieve an appropriate finish. This, they say, is why the repair cost totalled $402.50.

The tenant was not entitled, after vacating the property, to arrange for their own tradesperson to carry out the repairs, and the landlord was entitled to proceed with the work themselves. 5448914 2

However, the landlord's contractor stated in its invoice: "We have completed the repairs to the living room wall. We filled the TV bracket holes and sanded them to a smooth finish, followed by plastering and painting the area."

The tenant's evidence is that they had already plastered the holes and sanded them smooth. The landlord confirmed this, and it is also supported by the inspection report. In those circumstances, the contractor, Home Fix Group, has incorrectly invoiced for work that has already been completed.

Accordingly, it is appropriate to award half of the claimed repair cost. An amount of $201.25 is awarded. I do not consider this amount excessive, as it falls within the range of what would ordinarily be charged as a call-out fee by a tradesperson, regardless of the relatively limited amount of work ultimately required. Even if only painting remained to be completed, there was still work that needed to be carried out.

I do not consider the applicant to have been wholly or substantially successful in the application. As such, I make no award in respect of the filing fee.

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5448914. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Agent For Ronee And Anjleen Nand	$201.25		Agent For Ronee And Anjleen Nand

This dispute relates to a charge of $402.50 for repairing holes caused by the installation of a television wall bracket.

The tenant was not entitled, after vacating the property, to arrange for their own tradesperson to carry out the repairs, and the landlord was entitled to proceed with the work themselves. 5448914 2

I do not consider the applicant to have been wholly or substantially successful in the application. As such, I make no award in respect of the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5448914 — Property damage at Unit/Flat A, 18 Coronet Place, Avondale, Auckland 1026

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5448914 — Property damage at Unit/Flat A, 18 Coronet Place, Avondale, Auckland 1026

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions