How much money was awarded in case 5489554?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,359.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5489554?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5489554?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13964911-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5489554?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,359.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5489554?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5489554?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13964911-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

17 Murray Ward Drive, Te Kauwhata, Te Kauwhata 3710 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5489554 — Property damage

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5489554 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] tenant/s] must pay Barfoot & Thompson Limited As Agent For The Owner

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5489554 — net $27.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Repairs: wall damage from attempted repairs	$1,359.00	Repairs: wall damage from attempted repairs
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$27.44
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$27.44

[The tenant/s] tenant/s] must pay Barfoot & Thompson Limited As Agent For The Owner Tapp Property Group Ltd, [The tenant/s] landlord/s] $27.44 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,359.56 (BN-10077123) to Barfoot & Thompson Limited As Agent For The Owner Tapp Property Group Ltd, [The tenant/s] landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

The Landlord attended the hearing. The Tenant did not appear.

The Landlord applied for compensation, reimbursement of the filing fee and refund of the bond.

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: damage to the walls from attempted repairs in the lounge, kitchen, garage, bedrooms, hallway and laundry. The Landlord stated this was a brand-new house at the start of the tenancy and the tenants were the first occupants. Photographs of the damage were provided and an invoice confirming there were 19 walls that required repairing because the paint patches did not match the original colour. 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.

Barfoot & Thompson Limited As Agent For The Owner Tapp Property Group Ltd, [The tenant/s] landlord/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim the Tenant must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5489554 — net $27.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Repairs: wall damage from attempted repairs	$1,359.00	Repairs: wall damage from attempted repairs
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$27.44
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$27.44

Order

[The tenant/s] tenant/s] must pay Barfoot & Thompson Limited As Agent For The Owner Tapp Property Group Ltd, [The tenant/s] landlord/s] $27.44 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,359.56 (BN-10077123) to Barfoot & Thompson Limited As Agent For The Owner Tapp Property Group Ltd, [The tenant/s] landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

The Landlord attended the hearing. The Tenant did not appear.
The Landlord applied for compensation, reimbursement of the filing fee and refund of the bond.

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: damage to the walls from attempted repairs in the lounge, kitchen, garage, bedrooms, hallway and laundry. The Landlord stated this was a brand-new house at the start of the tenancy and the tenants were the first occupants. Photographs of the damage were provided and an invoice confirming there were 19 walls that required repairing because the paint patches did not match the original colour. 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.
Barfoot & Thompson Limited As Agent For The Owner Tapp Property Group Ltd, [The tenant/s] landlord/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim the Tenant must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5489554 — Property damage at 17 Murray Ward Drive, Te Kauwhata, Te Kauwhata 3710

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5489554 — Property damage at 17 Murray Ward Drive, Te Kauwhata, Te Kauwhata 3710

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.