What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5482290 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] tenant/s] must pay Accurate Infrastructure Solutions Limited $2,903.86

How much money was awarded in case 5482290?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5482290?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5482290?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/14161626-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5482290 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] tenant/s] must pay Accurate Infrastructure Solutions Limited $2,903.86

How much money was awarded in case 5482290?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5482290?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5482290?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/14161626-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

7 Duncraig Street, Silverstream, Upper Hutt 5019 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5482290 — Rent arrears

Reasons

The applicant attended the hearing. The respondent did not.

The applicant tells me that they are seeking $2,903.86 in rent arrears to 25 January 2025, which is when they tell me the tenancy ended. They have provided a rent summary showing the amount owing as at that date. I am satisfied that this record is correct and that the amount claimed is owing. Rent arrears of $2,903.86 are therefore awarded.

The landlord tells me that the house had six tenants, each of whom was on a separate tenancy agreement. On this basis, the landlord has apportioned certain costs between the tenants.

The landlord seeks $60 for furniture. They say that furniture was provided under the employment arrangement with the tenants, all of whom were recruited by the landlord from the Philippines. The total charge for the furniture was $180, and the landlord is seeking $60 from each of three tenants.

The landlord also seeks a share of a call-out charge for the repair of a dishwasher and fridge. They say that the call-out was requested by one of the tenants, but that the tradesperson who attended found no issue with either appliance. The landlord has therefore apportioned the cost equally between the six tenants.

The landlord also seeks $190.92 for cleaning following the tenants vacating the premises.

The landlord sought a carpet replacement cost. That claim was not included in the application and was therefore not considered.

In relation to the power bills, the landlord says that the arrangement was that they would cover the first $50 per tenant of each power bill, with the balance then divided between however many tenants happened to be residing at the property at the relevant time.

Section 39(3) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that a tenant is responsible for all outgoings in respect of the premises that are exclusively attributable to the tenant's occupation of the premises or to the tenant's use of the facilities.

The power costs claimed here were apportioned across multiple tenants. The landlord has not established that the amount they seek to recover from the respondent was exclusively attributable to the respondent's occupation of the premises or use of the facilities. No evidence of check meters or any other means of establishing the respondent's individual consumption has been provided. The claim for power costs is therefore dismissed.

The provision of furniture is not provided for in the tenancy agreement, and insufficient details or evidence have been provided to establish the respondent's liability for that cost. That claim is therefore dismissed.

The cleaning cost is a generalised cost relating to the property and the tenants collectively. On the evidence before me, I am not satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that any particular cleaning cost claimed is attributable to the named respondent. That claim is therefore dismissed.

As to the call-out fee, there is no evidence that the respondent requested the repair or that the cost is otherwise attributable to the respondent. That claim is also dismissed.

Most of the landlords claims have been dismissed. On that basis I do not consider them to be wholly or substantially successful and I therefore decline to award the filing fee.

Order

[The tenant/s] tenant/s] must pay Accurate Infrastructure Solutions Limited $2,903.86 immediately, being rent arrears to 25/01/2025.
The balance of the landlords claims are dismissed.

Reasons

The applicant attended the hearing. The respondent did not.
The applicant tells me that they are seeking $2,903.86 in rent arrears to 25 January 2025, which is when they tell me the tenancy ended. They have provided a rent summary showing the amount owing as at that date. I am satisfied that this record is correct and that the amount claimed is owing. Rent arrears of $2,903.86 are therefore awarded.
The landlord tells me that the house had six tenants, each of whom was on a separate tenancy agreement. On this basis, the landlord has apportioned certain costs between the tenants.
The landlord seeks $60 for furniture. They say that furniture was provided under the employment arrangement with the tenants, all of whom were recruited by the landlord from the Philippines. The total charge for the furniture was $180, and the landlord is seeking $60 from each of three tenants.
The landlord also seeks a share of a call-out charge for the repair of a dishwasher and fridge. They say that the call-out was requested by one of the tenants, but that the tradesperson who attended found no issue with either appliance. The landlord has therefore apportioned the cost equally between the six tenants.
The landlord also seeks $190.92 for cleaning following the tenants vacating the premises.
The landlord sought a carpet replacement cost. That claim was not included in the application and was therefore not considered.
In relation to the power bills, the landlord says that the arrangement was that they would cover the first $50 per tenant of each power bill, with the balance then divided between however many tenants happened to be residing at the property at the relevant time.
Section 39(3) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that a tenant is responsible for all outgoings in respect of the premises that are exclusively attributable to the tenant's occupation of the premises or to the tenant's use of the facilities.
The power costs claimed here were apportioned across multiple tenants. The landlord has not established that the amount they seek to recover from the respondent was exclusively attributable to the respondent's occupation of the premises or use of the facilities. No evidence of check meters or any other means of establishing the respondent's individual consumption has been provided. The claim for power costs is therefore dismissed.
The provision of furniture is not provided for in the tenancy agreement, and insufficient details or evidence have been provided to establish the respondent's liability for that cost. That claim is therefore dismissed.
The cleaning cost is a generalised cost relating to the property and the tenants collectively. On the evidence before me, I am not satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that any particular cleaning cost claimed is attributable to the named respondent. That claim is therefore dismissed.
As to the call-out fee, there is no evidence that the respondent requested the repair or that the cost is otherwise attributable to the respondent. That claim is also dismissed.
Most of the landlords claims have been dismissed. On that basis I do not consider them to be wholly or substantially successful and I therefore decline to award the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5482290 — Rent arrears at 7 Duncraig Street, Silverstream, Upper Hutt 5019

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5482290 — Rent arrears at 7 Duncraig Street, Silverstream, Upper Hutt 5019

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.