How much money was awarded in case 5513155?

Cleaning: $333.50 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Painting: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $50.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5513155?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5513155?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/14185186-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5513155?

Cleaning: $333.50 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Painting: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $50.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5513155?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5513155?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/14185186-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5513155 — Cleanliness

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5513155 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5513155 — net $511.50 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Repairs: Painting	$100.00	Repairs: Painting
Filing Fee	$28.00	Filing Fee
Carpet Cleaning	$333.50	Carpet Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$50.00	Rubbish removal
Net award	$511.50
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$511.50

The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.

[The tenant/s] must pay Brooksfield Property Management Limited As Agent For Anneke Price $483.50 immediately, calculated as shown in table below. DescriptionLandlord Carpet Cleaning$333.50 Rubbish removal$50.00 Repairs: Painting Filing Fee $100.00 $28.00 Total award$511.50 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$511.50

The landlord’s other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

A representative of the landlord attended the hearing.

The tenant did not attend the hearing but submitted a written response to the claims which I have considered.

The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee 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, return all keys and security devices, and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

The landlord claims that the tenant did not remove all rubbish. The claim is for $260.00 which included cleaning of bins and minor repairs. The repairs relate to matters which are wear and tear. Bins are inherently dirty, there is no general obligation on the tenant to clean them. I award $50.00 compensation for the landlord having to empty bins at the end of the tenancy.

The landlord had agreed that the tenant could have a dog at the premises. It was a condition of the pet clause, that the tenant would have the carpets commercially cleaned at the end of the tenancy. This is a reasonable requirement/condition and is enforceable. See s42G(2)(c) RTA.

In her submission to the Tribunal the tenant says that she had the premises commercially cleaned. Her submission does not refer to the carpet. In an email to the landlord, she claimed to have had the carpets cleaned. She has not provided any receipt or invoice to the Tribunal or landlord confirming that the carpets were cleaned at the end of her tenancy.

In the absence of any evidence that the tenant had the carpets cleaned, the landlord arranged and paid for commercial carpet cleaning. It is entitled to reimbursement of that cost.

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.

The landlord claimed paint damage of $402.50 and minor costs of a door stop and door strike plate being bent. The landlord provided in-going and out-going condition reports. My impression is that the landlord has unrealistic expectations that properties will be returned in an unlived in, pristine condition at the end of a tenancy.

People live in homes; minor paint chips occur through normal use. It was not unreasonable for the tenant to use a few removal hooks in the dwelling. The photographs provided by the landlord show that some paint damage went beyond fair wear and tear, for example in the bathroom. I award $100 for paint work.

As the landlord was partially successful, I have awarded reimbursement of the Tribunal application fee. I consider that the tenant was substantially successful, I also have regard to the circumstances in which this tenancy ended and have supressed the tenant’s details.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5513155 — net $511.50 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Repairs: Painting	$100.00	Repairs: Painting
Filing Fee	$28.00	Filing Fee
Carpet Cleaning	$333.50	Carpet Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$50.00	Rubbish removal
Net award	$511.50
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$511.50

Order

The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.
[The tenant/s] must pay Brooksfield Property Management Limited As Agent For Anneke Price $483.50 immediately, calculated as shown in table below. DescriptionLandlord Carpet Cleaning$333.50 Rubbish removal$50.00 Repairs: Painting Filing Fee $100.00 $28.00 Total award$511.50 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$511.50
The landlord’s other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

A representative of the landlord attended the hearing.
The tenant did not attend the hearing but submitted a written response to the claims which I have considered.
The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee 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, return all keys and security devices, and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord claims that the tenant did not remove all rubbish. The claim is for $260.00 which included cleaning of bins and minor repairs. The repairs relate to matters which are wear and tear. Bins are inherently dirty, there is no general obligation on the tenant to clean them. I award $50.00 compensation for the landlord having to empty bins at the end of the tenancy.
The landlord had agreed that the tenant could have a dog at the premises. It was a condition of the pet clause, that the tenant would have the carpets commercially cleaned at the end of the tenancy. This is a reasonable requirement/condition and is enforceable. See s42G(2)(c) RTA.
In her submission to the Tribunal the tenant says that she had the premises commercially cleaned. Her submission does not refer to the carpet. In an email to the landlord, she claimed to have had the carpets cleaned. She has not provided any receipt or invoice to the Tribunal or landlord confirming that the carpets were cleaned at the end of her tenancy.
In the absence of any evidence that the tenant had the carpets cleaned, the landlord arranged and paid for commercial carpet cleaning. It is entitled to reimbursement of that cost.

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.
The landlord claimed paint damage of $402.50 and minor costs of a door stop and door strike plate being bent. The landlord provided in-going and out-going condition reports. My impression is that the landlord has unrealistic expectations that properties will be returned in an unlived in, pristine condition at the end of a tenancy.
People live in homes; minor paint chips occur through normal use. It was not unreasonable for the tenant to use a few removal hooks in the dwelling. The photographs provided by the landlord show that some paint damage went beyond fair wear and tear, for example in the bathroom. I award $100 for paint work.
As the landlord was partially successful, I have awarded reimbursement of the Tribunal application fee. I consider that the tenant was substantially successful, I also have regard to the circumstances in which this tenancy ended and have supressed the tenant’s details.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5513155 — Cleanliness

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5513155 — Cleanliness

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.