What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5516149 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] tenant/s] must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities $353.32

How much money was awarded in case 5516149?

Cleaning: $78.45 awarded to landlord; Rent Credit: $277.72 awarded to tenant; Benchtop: $199.61 awarded to landlord; Carpet Joins/Patch: $210.05 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $142.93 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5516149?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5516149?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/14020540-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5516149 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] tenant/s] must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities $353.32

How much money was awarded in case 5516149?

Cleaning: $78.45 awarded to landlord; Rent Credit: $277.72 awarded to tenant; Benchtop: $199.61 awarded to landlord; Carpet Joins/Patch: $210.05 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $142.93 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5516149?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5516149?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/14020540-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat Unit 10, 4 Hoku Fiefiaanga Lane, Mount Roskill, Tenancy Tribunal Case 5516149 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

Unit/Flat Unit 10, 4 Hoku Fiefiaanga Lane, Mount Roskill, Tenancy Tribunal Case 5516149 — Property damage | TenantCheck

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5516149 — net $353.32 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Repairs: Carpet joins/patch	$210.05		Repairs: Carpet joins/patch
Repairs: Living room carpet replacement	$142.93		Repairs: Living room carpet replacement
Cleaning: Rangehood/stove top	$78.45		Cleaning: Rangehood/stove top
Repairs: Benchtop	$199.61		Repairs: Benchtop
Rent credit		$277.72	Rent credit
Total award	$631.04	$277.72
Net award	$353.32
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$353.32

Claims and awards for application 5516149 — net $353.32 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Repairs: Carpet joins/patch

Amount: $210.05
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Carpet joins/patch

Repairs: Living room carpet replacement

Amount: $142.93
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Living room carpet replacement

Cleaning: Rangehood/stove top

Amount: $78.45
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning: Rangehood/stove top

Repairs: Benchtop

Amount: $199.61
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Benchtop

Rent credit

Amount: $277.72
Awarded to: Tenant
Reason: Rent credit

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Property damage

Order

[The tenant/s] tenant/s] must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities $353.32 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing, set down to be conducted via video conference. There was no entry into the conference by the tenant, nor any call in to the conference by one of the telephone numbers provided on the Notice of Hearing. I was satisfied adequate service had completed and I continued with the hearing.
The landlord has applied for compensation following the end of the tenancy. A rent credit exists and has been applied against the debt.

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 tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy.
The tenant did, overall, leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy.
The landlord claimed for cleaning of the rangehood and oven as well as cleaning and scrubbing of the kitchen cupboards. A claim was also made for cleaning of the exterior porch.
The evidence was reviewed at the hearing. The landlord has failed to prove tenant liability except for the rangehood ($48.45) and stove top. There is no evidence of a need for an oven clean ($165.86) so $30.00 of that cost has been allocated for the stovetop. The porch looked in reasonable condition and the kitchen cupboards were also reasonably clean. The removal of a couple of cleaning items from under the sink is minor effort and not something that merits specific compensation.
The amounts ordered are proved.

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 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. 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: a. Three carpet areas required patching after what appears to have been significant pulling on joins. The costs of repairing these areas was $210.05 and this is awarded. b. The living room carpet was badly stained. The landlord sought compensation of $142.93 for replacement carpet on a depreciated basis. The carpet was just over six years old and the eight-year depreciation applied is consistent with what the Tribunal might apply. This claim is awarded in full. c. The kitchen benchtop was damaged in two close areas, consistent with damage from hot objects placed directly on the surface. The area is to the immediate right of the stove top. The repair strategy was to insert a tiled insert into a recess of the benchtop. The claimed cost of this was $199.61 and this is considered a practical, lower cost solution than a full benchtop replacement. The claim is awarded.
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 as applied by the landlord. 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.

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5516149 — net $353.32 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Repairs: Carpet joins/patch	$210.05		Repairs: Carpet joins/patch
Repairs: Living room carpet replacement	$142.93		Repairs: Living room carpet replacement
Cleaning: Rangehood/stove top	$78.45		Cleaning: Rangehood/stove top
Repairs: Benchtop	$199.61		Repairs: Benchtop
Rent credit		$277.72	Rent credit
Total award	$631.04	$277.72
Net award	$353.32
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$353.32

Claims and awards for application 5516149 — net $353.32 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Repairs: Carpet joins/patch

Amount: $210.05
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Carpet joins/patch

Repairs: Living room carpet replacement

Amount: $142.93
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Living room carpet replacement

Cleaning: Rangehood/stove top

Amount: $78.45
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning: Rangehood/stove top

Repairs: Benchtop

Amount: $199.61
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Benchtop

Rent credit

Amount: $277.72
Awarded to: Tenant
Reason: Rent credit

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Property damage

Order

[The tenant/s] tenant/s] must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities $353.32 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing, set down to be conducted via video conference. There was no entry into the conference by the tenant, nor any call in to the conference by one of the telephone numbers provided on the Notice of Hearing. I was satisfied adequate service had completed and I continued with the hearing.
The landlord has applied for compensation following the end of the tenancy. A rent credit exists and has been applied against the debt.

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 tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy.
The tenant did, overall, leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy.
The landlord claimed for cleaning of the rangehood and oven as well as cleaning and scrubbing of the kitchen cupboards. A claim was also made for cleaning of the exterior porch.
The evidence was reviewed at the hearing. The landlord has failed to prove tenant liability except for the rangehood ($48.45) and stove top. There is no evidence of a need for an oven clean ($165.86) so $30.00 of that cost has been allocated for the stovetop. The porch looked in reasonable condition and the kitchen cupboards were also reasonably clean. The removal of a couple of cleaning items from under the sink is minor effort and not something that merits specific compensation.
The amounts ordered are proved.

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 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. 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: a. Three carpet areas required patching after what appears to have been significant pulling on joins. The costs of repairing these areas was $210.05 and this is awarded. b. The living room carpet was badly stained. The landlord sought compensation of $142.93 for replacement carpet on a depreciated basis. The carpet was just over six years old and the eight-year depreciation applied is consistent with what the Tribunal might apply. This claim is awarded in full. c. The kitchen benchtop was damaged in two close areas, consistent with damage from hot objects placed directly on the surface. The area is to the immediate right of the stove top. The repair strategy was to insert a tiled insert into a recess of the benchtop. The claimed cost of this was $199.61 and this is considered a practical, lower cost solution than a full benchtop replacement. The claim is awarded.
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 as applied by the landlord. 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.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5516149 — Property damage at Unit/Flat Unit 10, 4 Hoku Fiefiaanga Lane, Mount Roskill,

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5516149 — Property damage at Unit/Flat Unit 10, 4 Hoku Fiefiaanga Lane, Mount Roskill,

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.

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.