What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5506009 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] must pay Accessible Properties New Zealand Limited

How much money was awarded in case 5506009?

Individual award amounts are in the official MoJ PDF. Claim amounts appear on this page when claims and net totals reconcile.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5506009?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Rent arrears, Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5506009?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13918534-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5506009 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] must pay Accessible Properties New Zealand Limited

How much money was awarded in case 5506009?

Individual award amounts are in the official MoJ PDF. Claim amounts appear on this page when claims and net totals reconcile.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5506009?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Rent arrears, Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5506009?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13918534-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

22 Anzac Road, Gate Pa, Tauranga 3112 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5506009 — Property damage

Order

[The tenant/s] must pay Accessible Properties New Zealand Limited $5,834.93 immediately, calculated as follows: DescriptionAmount Rent arrears$2,170.90 Cleaning, rubbish, gardening and missing chattels$1,733.11 Damage to the premises$2,511.92 Filing fee$27.00 Total$6,442.93 Minus Bond$608.00 Tenant to pay$5,834.93
Bond Services is to pay the full bond of $608.00 to Accessible Properties New Zealand Limited immediately

Reasons

The Landlord attended the hearing. The Tenant did not.
The Landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, payment of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The Landlord provided a rent summary establishing that $2,170.90 remained owing when the tenancy ended. I am satisfied that amount is due.

Did the Tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

At the end of the tenancy, the Tenant was required to leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, remove all rubbish, and leave at the premises the chattels provided by the Landlord: s 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
I have considered the entry and exit inspection reports, photographs, videos, the scope of the contractor’s work as per the Landlord’s itemised worksheets and invoices. The evidence establishes that: a. rubbish, including a bed and mattress, was left at the premises; b. the lawns and gardens required substantial work; c. two sets of lounge curtains were missing; d. the kitchen plug and chain required replacement; and e. the stove and oven required cleaning.
The exit inspection records that the lounge curtains were missing and that the stove and oven tray and rack were in poor condition at the end of the tenancy.
However, most other rooms and surfaces were recorded as being in good or average condition. The evidence does not establish that a major whole-house clean or separate rangehood clean was reasonably required. The Landlord says that they will provide a full breakdown of cleaning tasks and labour for future cleaning claims.
I award: a. stove and oven cleaning: $138.81; b. rubbish removal: $217.10; c. gardening and lawn work: $497.39; d. replacement curtains: $866.07; and e. replacement kitchen plug and chain: $13.74.
The total awarded for the Tenant’s obligations at the end of the tenancy is $1,733.11. The balance of the cleaning claim, being $862.74, is dismissed.

Is the Tenant responsible for damage to the premises?

The Landlord must prove that damage occurred during the tenancy and was more than fair wear and tear. Once that is established, the Tenant must prove that the damage was not intentionally caused or that the Tenant is otherwise not liable. The Tenant is also responsible for the actions of people permitted to be at the premises. See ss 40(2)(a), 41, 49A and 49B Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
A tenant’s liability for careless damage is limited under s 49B. That limitation does not apply to damage intentionally caused by the Tenant or a person for whose actions the Tenant is responsible.
Damage is intentional where a person intends to cause damage and takes the necessary steps to achieve that purpose. It also includes conduct undertaken knowing that damage is a certainty. See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.
The inspection evidence shows holes in the walls of all three bedrooms. Bedroom 3 also had painted handprints and further wall damage. The damage required substantial plasterboard repairs, the temporary removal and refitting of a power point, and repainting of the affected rooms. The evidence also establishes damage to the garage door requiring it to be boarded up.
The number, location, and nature of the holes, together with the painted handprints, establish intentional damage rather than fair wear and tear. The garage-door damage was at least careless.
I award: a. plasterboard repairs and refitting the power point: $661.90; b. repainting bedrooms 1, 2 and 3: $1,762.95; and c. boarding up the damaged garage door: $87.07.
The total awarded for damage is $2,511.92.
The repairs and repainting were completed and were reasonably required to remedy the damage. Repainting the affected bedroom walls was required due to multiple gib repairs. The amounts claimed are reasonable, and no further deduction for betterment or depreciation is required.
The Landlord withdrew the claim of $552.48 for door handles and window latches as there was a record in their system indicating limited available evidence to support pre-tenancy condition. No order is made for that item.
The Landlord has substantially succeeded. I reimburse the filing fee.

Order

[The tenant/s] must pay Accessible Properties New Zealand Limited $5,834.93 immediately, calculated as follows: DescriptionAmount Rent arrears$2,170.90 Cleaning, rubbish, gardening and missing chattels$1,733.11 Damage to the premises$2,511.92 Filing fee$27.00 Total$6,442.93 Minus Bond$608.00 Tenant to pay$5,834.93
Bond Services is to pay the full bond of $608.00 to Accessible Properties New Zealand Limited immediately

Reasons

The Landlord attended the hearing. The Tenant did not.
The Landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, payment of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The Landlord provided a rent summary establishing that $2,170.90 remained owing when the tenancy ended. I am satisfied that amount is due.

Did the Tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

At the end of the tenancy, the Tenant was required to leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, remove all rubbish, and leave at the premises the chattels provided by the Landlord: s 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
I have considered the entry and exit inspection reports, photographs, videos, the scope of the contractor’s work as per the Landlord’s itemised worksheets and invoices. The evidence establishes that: a. rubbish, including a bed and mattress, was left at the premises; b. the lawns and gardens required substantial work; c. two sets of lounge curtains were missing; d. the kitchen plug and chain required replacement; and e. the stove and oven required cleaning.
The exit inspection records that the lounge curtains were missing and that the stove and oven tray and rack were in poor condition at the end of the tenancy.
However, most other rooms and surfaces were recorded as being in good or average condition. The evidence does not establish that a major whole-house clean or separate rangehood clean was reasonably required. The Landlord says that they will provide a full breakdown of cleaning tasks and labour for future cleaning claims.
I award: a. stove and oven cleaning: $138.81; b. rubbish removal: $217.10; c. gardening and lawn work: $497.39; d. replacement curtains: $866.07; and e. replacement kitchen plug and chain: $13.74.
The total awarded for the Tenant’s obligations at the end of the tenancy is $1,733.11. The balance of the cleaning claim, being $862.74, is dismissed.

Is the Tenant responsible for damage to the premises?

The Landlord must prove that damage occurred during the tenancy and was more than fair wear and tear. Once that is established, the Tenant must prove that the damage was not intentionally caused or that the Tenant is otherwise not liable. The Tenant is also responsible for the actions of people permitted to be at the premises. See ss 40(2)(a), 41, 49A and 49B Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
A tenant’s liability for careless damage is limited under s 49B. That limitation does not apply to damage intentionally caused by the Tenant or a person for whose actions the Tenant is responsible.
Damage is intentional where a person intends to cause damage and takes the necessary steps to achieve that purpose. It also includes conduct undertaken knowing that damage is a certainty. See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.
The inspection evidence shows holes in the walls of all three bedrooms. Bedroom 3 also had painted handprints and further wall damage. The damage required substantial plasterboard repairs, the temporary removal and refitting of a power point, and repainting of the affected rooms. The evidence also establishes damage to the garage door requiring it to be boarded up.
The number, location, and nature of the holes, together with the painted handprints, establish intentional damage rather than fair wear and tear. The garage-door damage was at least careless.
I award: a. plasterboard repairs and refitting the power point: $661.90; b. repainting bedrooms 1, 2 and 3: $1,762.95; and c. boarding up the damaged garage door: $87.07.
The total awarded for damage is $2,511.92.
The repairs and repainting were completed and were reasonably required to remedy the damage. Repainting the affected bedroom walls was required due to multiple gib repairs. The amounts claimed are reasonable, and no further deduction for betterment or depreciation is required.
The Landlord withdrew the claim of $552.48 for door handles and window latches as there was a record in their system indicating limited available evidence to support pre-tenancy condition. No order is made for that item.
The Landlord has substantially succeeded. I reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5506009 — Property damage at 22 Anzac Road, Gate Pa, Tauranga 3112

Tenancy Tribunal case 5506009 — Property damage at 22 Anzac Road, Gate Pa, Tauranga 3112

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Did the Tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Is the Tenant responsible for damage to the premises?

Property management

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Did the Tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Is the Tenant responsible for damage to the premises?

Property management