What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4343747?

The tribunal order states: The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,720.00 (3480446-010) to Cameo

How much money was awarded in case 4343747?

Cleaning: $62.02 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $150.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,525.71 awarded to landlord; (Back Door Glass Re Installed: $161.00 awarded to landlord; (Door frames x 3 and chips in paint…: $713.00 awarded to landlord; (Downstairs Large Bedroom Ceiling: $385.25 awarded to landlord; (Holes in lounge walls, kitchen cupb…: $1,397.25 awarded to landlord; (Toilet Seat Replaced: $69.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $142.64 awarded to landlord; Smoke Alarms: $63.78 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4343747?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4343747?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9875021-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4343747?

The tribunal order states: The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,720.00 (3480446-010) to Cameo

How much money was awarded in case 4343747?

Cleaning: $62.02 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $150.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,525.71 awarded to landlord; (Back Door Glass Re Installed: $161.00 awarded to landlord; (Door frames x 3 and chips in paint…: $713.00 awarded to landlord; (Downstairs Large Bedroom Ceiling: $385.25 awarded to landlord; (Holes in lounge walls, kitchen cupb…: $1,397.25 awarded to landlord; (Toilet Seat Replaced: $69.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $142.64 awarded to landlord; Smoke Alarms: $63.78 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4343747?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4343747?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9875021-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 3, 5 Braemar Road, Castor Bay, Auckland 0620 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4343747 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Unit/Flat 3, 5 Braemar Road, Castor Bay, Auckland 0620 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4343747 — 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 4343747 — net $3,170.09 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears (to 8 June 2022	$2,525.71	Rent arrears (to 8 June 2022
Rubbish removal	$142.64	Rubbish removal
Cleaning: (Initial Cleaning	$150.00	Cleaning: (Initial Cleaning
Cleaning Products	$62.02	Cleaning Products
Cleaning: (Full final clean after repairs	$200.00	Cleaning: (Full final clean after repairs
Repairs: (Downstairs large bedroom ceiling	$385.25	Repairs: (Downstairs large bedroom ceiling
Repairs: (Door frames x 3 and chips in paint to stairwell, hallway and door frames	$713.00	Repairs: (Door frames x 3 and chips in paint to stairwell, hallway and door frames
Repairs: (Holes in lounge walls, kitchen cupboards scratched and chunk out of drawer and scrapes on master bedroom wall	$1,397.25	Repairs: (Holes in lounge walls, kitchen cupboards scratched and chunk out of drawer and scrapes on master bedroom wall
Repairs: (Back door glass re installed	$161.00	Repairs: (Back door glass re installed
Repairs: (Toilet seat replaced	$69.00	Repairs: (Toilet seat replaced
Replace smoke alarms x2	$63.78	Replace smoke alarms x2
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,170.09
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,170.09

Claims and awards for application 4343747 — net $3,170.09 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears (to 8 June 2022

Amount: $2,525.71
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears (to 8 June 2022

Rubbish removal

Amount: $142.64
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal

Cleaning: (Initial Cleaning

Amount: $150.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning: (Initial Cleaning

Cleaning Products

Amount: $62.02
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning Products

Cleaning: (Full final clean after repairs

Amount: $200.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning: (Full final clean after repairs

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Filing Fee Rent arrears Property damage Rubbish Removal Replace Smoke Alarms

Order

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,720.00 (3480446-010) to Cameo Investments Limited immediately.
Gareth Barend Erasmus and Rebecca Louise Peltzer owe Cameo Investments Limited $3,170.09, calculated as shown in table below (“the debt”).
Gareth Barend Erasmus and Rebecca Louise Peltzer must repay the debt to the landlord as follows: a. $40.00 per week, towards the repayment of the debt, to be made each Wednesday for 79 weeks, with the first $40.00 payment being due on Wednesday 31st January 2024 and the last $40.00 payment being due on 6th August 2025; and b. A final payment of the remainder of the debt of $10.09, due of 13 August 2025.
Where Mr Gareth Barend Erasmus secures employment before the 13 August 2025, he must repay the remainder of the debt within 16 weeks of commencing employment. He must notify the landlord that he has commenced employment and must make arrangements with his employer to repay the remainder of the debt directly from his wages in 16 equal weekly instalments.
If the tenant fails to pay any of the payments in paragraphs 3 and 4 above within 2 working days of the due dates, the balance of the debt will be payable immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The tenants claimed that they were not liable for the rent arrears as they had agreed an earlier move out date (around 24 May 2022) and the landlord had reneged on that agreement putting them to the expense of paying two lots of rent from 24 May to 6 June 2022 (the date the tenants were required to vacate as per the 90-day notice issued on 8 March 2022).
The tenants also claimed that they were not liable for the repair costs as they had either undertaken the repairs themselves or the damage was fair wear and tear.
Finally, the tenants claimed that they had not been given the opportunity to repair the damage or clean the premises after the 9 June 2022 inspection had been undertaken by the landlord. Once the landlord has vacant possession of the property and the tenants are no longer paying rent on the premises, the landlord is under no obligation to allow the tenant to re-enter the property to undertake the remedial work and cleaning requirements highlighted to the tenants under the exit inspection report. The landlord has the right to choose how to remediate any damage done by the tenants, to undertake any cleaning required to return the property to a reasonably clean and tidy state and to claim the expenses of doing so. Repayment of debt after commencing employment
At the hearing Mr Gareth Barend Erasmus accepted responsibility for the repayment of most of the debt. He is currently unemployed, on a government benefit and seeking employment.
The landlord agreed to weekly instalments of $40.00 to repay the debt until such time as Mr Erasmus is able to secure employment.
He and Ms Peltzer have committed to continue to make the $40.00 per week repayments agreed until Mr Erasmus secures employment.
Mr Erasmus has committed to repay the remainder of the debt in full within 16 weeks of the date he commences employment.
As such it is ordered that Mr Erasmus pays the remaining debt in 16 equal weekly instalments from the first week after he commences employment until the debt is fully repaid at the end of that 16 weeks.
It is noted that the landlord has accepted the $40.00 per week initial repayment plan until such time as Mr Erasmus commences employment based on his promise to repay the remainder of the debt in full within 16 weeks of commencing employment. I record the parties full repayment agreement for the landlord’s enforcement purposes.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 8 June 2022. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy. The rent summary shows the tenants did not pay rent from 14 May 2022 to 8 June 2022 but continued to live in the premises until midnight on 8 June 2022.
The tenants defence, that they were not liable for the rent arrears as they had agreed an earlier move out date (around 24 May 2022) and the landlord had reneged on that agreement, putting them to the expense of paying two lots of rent from 24 May to 6 June 2022 fails.
The tenants remained living in, and had their personal possessions stored in, the premises until 8 June 2022. They did not move out and offer up vacant possession to the landlord on 24 May 2022 or on 6 June 2022 when the 90 day notice to vacate came into force. Therefore, the tenants cannot claim that they are not liable for rent for a period that they were still living in the premises, especially when there was written evidence that they requested and extension of the 6 June 2022 move out date to 8 June 2022.

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. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
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 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: a. The downstairs bedroom ceiling had holes in it from when the bath overflowed resulting in holes being drilled in the ceiling; b. Three door frames had chipped paint as did the paint in the hallway and stairwell from the tenants moving into the premises. The premises had been newly painted in early 2020 prior to the tenants moving in; c. Large holes in lounge wall, kitchen cupboards scratched throughout, chunk missing from drawer, scrapes and marks throughout master bedroom that required repair and repaint; d. Back door glass had been removed to install a cat door and had to be reinstalled; e. Cracked toilet seat that needed replacement; f. 2 smoke alarms that had been removed and were damaged and not working when the landlord tried to reinstall them.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
There was evidence produced where the tenants had tried to paint over some scuffs and scratches but these were still visible as the paint used on the doorframes was to light and there appears to have been no sanding of the scuffs and scratches. The landlord had to pay more to get these scuffs and scratches repaired and painted to a reasonable standard.
The amounts ordered are proved.
I have considered 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 considered the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Filing Fee
Because Cameo Investments Limited has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

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 4343747 — net $3,170.09 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears (to 8 June 2022	$2,525.71	Rent arrears (to 8 June 2022
Rubbish removal	$142.64	Rubbish removal
Cleaning: (Initial Cleaning	$150.00	Cleaning: (Initial Cleaning
Cleaning Products	$62.02	Cleaning Products
Cleaning: (Full final clean after repairs	$200.00	Cleaning: (Full final clean after repairs
Repairs: (Downstairs large bedroom ceiling	$385.25	Repairs: (Downstairs large bedroom ceiling
Repairs: (Door frames x 3 and chips in paint to stairwell, hallway and door frames	$713.00	Repairs: (Door frames x 3 and chips in paint to stairwell, hallway and door frames
Repairs: (Holes in lounge walls, kitchen cupboards scratched and chunk out of drawer and scrapes on master bedroom wall	$1,397.25	Repairs: (Holes in lounge walls, kitchen cupboards scratched and chunk out of drawer and scrapes on master bedroom wall
Repairs: (Back door glass re installed	$161.00	Repairs: (Back door glass re installed
Repairs: (Toilet seat replaced	$69.00	Repairs: (Toilet seat replaced
Replace smoke alarms x2	$63.78	Replace smoke alarms x2
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,170.09
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,170.09

Claims and awards for application 4343747 — net $3,170.09 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears (to 8 June 2022

Amount: $2,525.71
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears (to 8 June 2022

Rubbish removal

Amount: $142.64
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal

Cleaning: (Initial Cleaning

Amount: $150.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning: (Initial Cleaning

Cleaning Products

Amount: $62.02
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning Products

Cleaning: (Full final clean after repairs

Amount: $200.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning: (Full final clean after repairs

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Filing Fee Rent arrears Property damage Rubbish Removal Replace Smoke Alarms

Order

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,720.00 (3480446-010) to Cameo Investments Limited immediately.
Gareth Barend Erasmus and Rebecca Louise Peltzer owe Cameo Investments Limited $3,170.09, calculated as shown in table below (“the debt”).
Gareth Barend Erasmus and Rebecca Louise Peltzer must repay the debt to the landlord as follows: a. $40.00 per week, towards the repayment of the debt, to be made each Wednesday for 79 weeks, with the first $40.00 payment being due on Wednesday 31st January 2024 and the last $40.00 payment being due on 6th August 2025; and b. A final payment of the remainder of the debt of $10.09, due of 13 August 2025.
Where Mr Gareth Barend Erasmus secures employment before the 13 August 2025, he must repay the remainder of the debt within 16 weeks of commencing employment. He must notify the landlord that he has commenced employment and must make arrangements with his employer to repay the remainder of the debt directly from his wages in 16 equal weekly instalments.
If the tenant fails to pay any of the payments in paragraphs 3 and 4 above within 2 working days of the due dates, the balance of the debt will be payable immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The tenants claimed that they were not liable for the rent arrears as they had agreed an earlier move out date (around 24 May 2022) and the landlord had reneged on that agreement putting them to the expense of paying two lots of rent from 24 May to 6 June 2022 (the date the tenants were required to vacate as per the 90-day notice issued on 8 March 2022).
The tenants also claimed that they were not liable for the repair costs as they had either undertaken the repairs themselves or the damage was fair wear and tear.
Finally, the tenants claimed that they had not been given the opportunity to repair the damage or clean the premises after the 9 June 2022 inspection had been undertaken by the landlord. Once the landlord has vacant possession of the property and the tenants are no longer paying rent on the premises, the landlord is under no obligation to allow the tenant to re-enter the property to undertake the remedial work and cleaning requirements highlighted to the tenants under the exit inspection report. The landlord has the right to choose how to remediate any damage done by the tenants, to undertake any cleaning required to return the property to a reasonably clean and tidy state and to claim the expenses of doing so. Repayment of debt after commencing employment
At the hearing Mr Gareth Barend Erasmus accepted responsibility for the repayment of most of the debt. He is currently unemployed, on a government benefit and seeking employment.
The landlord agreed to weekly instalments of $40.00 to repay the debt until such time as Mr Erasmus is able to secure employment.
He and Ms Peltzer have committed to continue to make the $40.00 per week repayments agreed until Mr Erasmus secures employment.
Mr Erasmus has committed to repay the remainder of the debt in full within 16 weeks of the date he commences employment.
As such it is ordered that Mr Erasmus pays the remaining debt in 16 equal weekly instalments from the first week after he commences employment until the debt is fully repaid at the end of that 16 weeks.
It is noted that the landlord has accepted the $40.00 per week initial repayment plan until such time as Mr Erasmus commences employment based on his promise to repay the remainder of the debt in full within 16 weeks of commencing employment. I record the parties full repayment agreement for the landlord’s enforcement purposes.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 8 June 2022. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy. The rent summary shows the tenants did not pay rent from 14 May 2022 to 8 June 2022 but continued to live in the premises until midnight on 8 June 2022.
The tenants defence, that they were not liable for the rent arrears as they had agreed an earlier move out date (around 24 May 2022) and the landlord had reneged on that agreement, putting them to the expense of paying two lots of rent from 24 May to 6 June 2022 fails.
The tenants remained living in, and had their personal possessions stored in, the premises until 8 June 2022. They did not move out and offer up vacant possession to the landlord on 24 May 2022 or on 6 June 2022 when the 90 day notice to vacate came into force. Therefore, the tenants cannot claim that they are not liable for rent for a period that they were still living in the premises, especially when there was written evidence that they requested and extension of the 6 June 2022 move out date to 8 June 2022.

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. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
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 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: a. The downstairs bedroom ceiling had holes in it from when the bath overflowed resulting in holes being drilled in the ceiling; b. Three door frames had chipped paint as did the paint in the hallway and stairwell from the tenants moving into the premises. The premises had been newly painted in early 2020 prior to the tenants moving in; c. Large holes in lounge wall, kitchen cupboards scratched throughout, chunk missing from drawer, scrapes and marks throughout master bedroom that required repair and repaint; d. Back door glass had been removed to install a cat door and had to be reinstalled; e. Cracked toilet seat that needed replacement; f. 2 smoke alarms that had been removed and were damaged and not working when the landlord tried to reinstall them.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
There was evidence produced where the tenants had tried to paint over some scuffs and scratches but these were still visible as the paint used on the doorframes was to light and there appears to have been no sanding of the scuffs and scratches. The landlord had to pay more to get these scuffs and scratches repaired and painted to a reasonable standard.
The amounts ordered are proved.
I have considered 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 considered the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Filing Fee
Because Cameo Investments Limited has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4343747 — Property damage at Unit/Flat 3, 5 Braemar Road, Castor Bay, Auckland 0620

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4343747 — Property damage at Unit/Flat 3, 5 Braemar Road, Castor Bay, Auckland 0620

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

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 the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

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 the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions