What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4479921?

The tribunal order states: No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression

How much money was awarded in case 4479921?

Cleaning: $287.50 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $711.85 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $149.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $54.95 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4479921?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4479921?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9375403-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4479921?

The tribunal order states: No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression

How much money was awarded in case 4479921?

Cleaning: $287.50 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $711.85 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $149.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $54.95 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4479921?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4479921?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9375403-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

44 Lavinia Crescent, Mangere East, Auckland 2024 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4479921 — Cleanliness

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4479921 — net $1,223.74 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning (agreed by consent	$287.50	11. The landlord produced an invoice and relied on photographic evidence at the end of the tenancy.
Rubbish removal - bin hire	$711.85	Rubbish removal - bin hire
Rubbish removal - bin hire	$149.00	Rubbish removal - bin hire
Rubbish removal - bin hire	$54.95	Rubbish removal - bin hire
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,223.74
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,223.74

Order

No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.
Rona Erikson must pay Clarke Group Property Management Limited $1,223.74 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
The tenant must uplift her possessions left at the premises on or before 5pm on Friday 13 October 2023.
The tenant is to contact the landlord in order to arrange access for the removal of the tenant’s goods.
If the tenant does not uplift the possessions in accordance with order 4 above, the landlord is to take reasonable steps to assess the market value of the tenant’s goods that remain after that date and time.
If the costs of transporting and selling the tenant’s goods is less than their market value, then the landlord may dispose of them as the landlord thinks fit.
If the costs of transporting and selling the tenant’s goods is greater than their market value, then the landlord must sell them and deduct from the sale proceeds any reasonable cost of their sale and storage.
The landlord may dispose of any goods that have no saleable value.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The landlord had originally applied for rent arrears, water arrears, compensation for cleaning, rubbish removal, flexi bin removal, lock change, reimbursement of the filing fee and a disposal order following the end of the tenancy.
On 28 April 2023, the Tribunal ordered Ms Erickson to pay Clarke Group Property Management $2,141.68, consisting of rent arrears of $2,095.06 plus water arrears of $46.62. The claim for compensation for lock change was dismissed. The claim for compensation for cleaning, rubbish removal and a disposal order was adjourned.
This order addresses the remaining claims.

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 (“RTA”).
The tenancy ended by eviction on 7 December 2022.
The landlord claims the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish.
The tenant initially disputed the landlord’s claim stating that she had made plans to clean and remove the rubbish, but she was not given an opportunity to do so. She also stated that she had made plans for removal of her belongings twice by hiring trucks which were cancelled leading to a loss for her in arranging the trucks to remove her belongings. Cleaning
Tenants have a duty to keep the property in a reasonably clean and tidy state and to leave it clean and tidy. The obligation is not to leave the premises in an immaculate standard of cleanliness and tidiness, nor does it mean that it will necessarily be up to the standard that a landlord might consider for a new tenant. The test of reasonableness is an objective one. In other words, the question is whether an average reasonable bystander would consider the premises to be reasonably clean and tidy. The onus is on the applicant to establish, with evidence provided to support it.
As the tenancy ended on 7 December 2022, the tenant was required to have the premises left in the required condition at that stage. There is no legal obligation for the landlord to allow a tenant to remedy cleaning issues after this date.
The landlord produced an invoice and relied on photographic evidence at the end of the tenancy. The landlord’s photographs show that some cleaning was required to bring the premises to a reasonably clean and tidy condition. The claim is fair and reasonable. This was also accepted by the tenant. Rubbish removal
As noted above, the tenancy ended by eviction on 7 December 2022. On that date, the tenant had not removed all rubbish and all her possessions from the premises and the premises remained full of the tenant’s goods.
There is no legal obligation for the landlord to allow a tenant to remove rubbish after the date the tenancy ended.
In this case, the landlord says that arrangements for the tenant to collect her belongings and remove rubbish were made through her sister in law. The sister in law did not make contact with them until January 2023. The landlord says the owner had stored the tenant’s items for more than 35 days. They contend that the landlord (through the owner) had made a more than a reasonable effort to make arrangements with the tenant to collect her belongings and rubbish. The owner was carrying out extensive renovations and they had to be mindful of this. While the tenant picked up some her belongings, rubbish and other items remained.
The tenant said she was reliant on her sister in law for helping her. She was not happy with the arrangements made from the landlord’s end. She said she had attempted to collect the rubbish and her belongings, but this was cancelled twice due to work being carried out by the owner at the property and/or miscommunication. In all, she had hired a truck 3 times, on 18 February 2023, 8 March 2023 and 15 March 2023 and provided a copy of the booking to confirm this. She said although she tried to make arrangements, she found it difficult as the owner did not co-operate.
The Tribunal was faced with unresolved conflicting views. Essentially, the landlord is entitled to vacant possession of the property at the end of the tenancy. This means, a property that is free of the tenant’s possessions and rubbish.
While I have sympathy for the tenant’s position it is of her own making in that she did not provide vacant possession on 7 December 2022. The tenant’s failure to remove the rubbish at the end of the tenancy means she is liable for the cost/loss incurred by the landlord for rubbish removal. I am satisfied that the tenant should pay for the cost of rubbish removal/bin hire.
Given the conflicting views and lack of corroborating evidence, I am not in a position to determine whether costs should be deducted due to the cancellation of trucks hired to remove the tenant’s goods.

Is the landlord entitled to a disposal of goods order?

The landlord has applied for the disposal of goods the tenant left at the premises at the end of the tenancy.
Section 62(2) RTA provides that if the tenant leaves on the premises goods that are neither foodstuffs nor other perishable goods, the landlord must, immediately after taking possession of the premises, make all reasonable efforts to contact the tenant and to agree with the tenant on a period within which the tenant is to collect the goods.
Section 62(3) provides that if the landlord is unable to contact the tenant or to agree on a period with the tenant, or if the tenant fails to collect the goods within the agreed period, the landlord must ensure that any personal documents belonging to the tenant are stored securely and must deal with the other goods either— (a) in accordance with section 62A; or (b) by securing them in safe storage and by applying to the Tribunal in accordance with section 62B.
Section 62A provides that a landlord may deal with the goods to which section 62(3) applies, other than personal documents belonging to the tenant, by making all reasonable efforts to assess the market value of those goods. If that assessment under subsection indicates that any of the goods have a value below the cost of storing, transporting, and selling them, the landlord may immediately dispose of those goods in any way the landlord thinks fit.
If the assessment indicates that any of the goods have a value above the cost of storing, transporting, and selling them, the landlord must secure those goods in safe storage for not less than 35 days from the date on which the landlord first took possession of those goods.
Section 62A(5) states that if before the landlord disposes of the goods under subsection the tenant claims the goods and any personal documents belonging to the tenant or claims either the goods or the documents: (a) the landlord may require the tenant to pay the landlord’s actual and reasonable costs arising out of the storage of the goods; and (b) the landlord must release to the tenant any goods and personal documents claimed by the tenant, subject to payment of any costs required under paragraph (a); and (c) the tenant must give the landlord a receipt for any goods and personal documents released to the tenant.
If, after the period of 35 days specified in section 62(3), the goods or any personal documents belonging to the tenant remain unclaimed, the landlord must— (a) continue to secure those goods and personal documents in safe storage to await any claims by the tenant; or (b) do the following: (i) take any personal documents belonging to the tenant to the nearest Police station and obtain a receipt for them from a Police employee; and (ii) sell the other goods by public auction or by private contract at a reasonable market price.
The tenant agreed at the previous hearing that there were no longer any outstanding goods to be collected and she had all the items she wanted. However, the tenant raised that she was missing items.
In these circumstances, it is appropriate to allow a further and final short period for the tenant until 5pm Friday 13 October 2023 to remove her goods from the premises, given there is now over 10 months since the tenancy ended.
Failing the tenant uplifting her possessions by that time, the landlord is entitled to dispose of having made all reasonable steps to assess their market value.
If the tenant’s goods’ value is less than the costs of transporting and selling them, then the landlord may immediately dispose of the tenant’s goods as the landlord thinks fit.
However, if the value of the tenant’s goods are more than the costs of storing, transporting and selling them, then the landlord must sell them and may charge the tenant for the actual and reasonable costs of storage and their sale.
The landlord may dispose of any goods that have no saleable value.
As the landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim, I must order the other party to reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4479921 — net $1,223.74 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning (agreed by consent	$287.50	11. The landlord produced an invoice and relied on photographic evidence at the end of the tenancy.
Rubbish removal - bin hire	$711.85	Rubbish removal - bin hire
Rubbish removal - bin hire	$149.00	Rubbish removal - bin hire
Rubbish removal - bin hire	$54.95	Rubbish removal - bin hire
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,223.74
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,223.74

Order

No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.
Rona Erikson must pay Clarke Group Property Management Limited $1,223.74 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
The tenant must uplift her possessions left at the premises on or before 5pm on Friday 13 October 2023.
The tenant is to contact the landlord in order to arrange access for the removal of the tenant’s goods.
If the tenant does not uplift the possessions in accordance with order 4 above, the landlord is to take reasonable steps to assess the market value of the tenant’s goods that remain after that date and time.
If the costs of transporting and selling the tenant’s goods is less than their market value, then the landlord may dispose of them as the landlord thinks fit.
If the costs of transporting and selling the tenant’s goods is greater than their market value, then the landlord must sell them and deduct from the sale proceeds any reasonable cost of their sale and storage.
The landlord may dispose of any goods that have no saleable value.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The landlord had originally applied for rent arrears, water arrears, compensation for cleaning, rubbish removal, flexi bin removal, lock change, reimbursement of the filing fee and a disposal order following the end of the tenancy.
On 28 April 2023, the Tribunal ordered Ms Erickson to pay Clarke Group Property Management $2,141.68, consisting of rent arrears of $2,095.06 plus water arrears of $46.62. The claim for compensation for lock change was dismissed. The claim for compensation for cleaning, rubbish removal and a disposal order was adjourned.
This order addresses the remaining claims.

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 (“RTA”).
The tenancy ended by eviction on 7 December 2022.
The landlord claims the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish.
The tenant initially disputed the landlord’s claim stating that she had made plans to clean and remove the rubbish, but she was not given an opportunity to do so. She also stated that she had made plans for removal of her belongings twice by hiring trucks which were cancelled leading to a loss for her in arranging the trucks to remove her belongings. Cleaning
Tenants have a duty to keep the property in a reasonably clean and tidy state and to leave it clean and tidy. The obligation is not to leave the premises in an immaculate standard of cleanliness and tidiness, nor does it mean that it will necessarily be up to the standard that a landlord might consider for a new tenant. The test of reasonableness is an objective one. In other words, the question is whether an average reasonable bystander would consider the premises to be reasonably clean and tidy. The onus is on the applicant to establish, with evidence provided to support it.
As the tenancy ended on 7 December 2022, the tenant was required to have the premises left in the required condition at that stage. There is no legal obligation for the landlord to allow a tenant to remedy cleaning issues after this date.
The landlord produced an invoice and relied on photographic evidence at the end of the tenancy. The landlord’s photographs show that some cleaning was required to bring the premises to a reasonably clean and tidy condition. The claim is fair and reasonable. This was also accepted by the tenant. Rubbish removal
As noted above, the tenancy ended by eviction on 7 December 2022. On that date, the tenant had not removed all rubbish and all her possessions from the premises and the premises remained full of the tenant’s goods.
There is no legal obligation for the landlord to allow a tenant to remove rubbish after the date the tenancy ended.
In this case, the landlord says that arrangements for the tenant to collect her belongings and remove rubbish were made through her sister in law. The sister in law did not make contact with them until January 2023. The landlord says the owner had stored the tenant’s items for more than 35 days. They contend that the landlord (through the owner) had made a more than a reasonable effort to make arrangements with the tenant to collect her belongings and rubbish. The owner was carrying out extensive renovations and they had to be mindful of this. While the tenant picked up some her belongings, rubbish and other items remained.
The tenant said she was reliant on her sister in law for helping her. She was not happy with the arrangements made from the landlord’s end. She said she had attempted to collect the rubbish and her belongings, but this was cancelled twice due to work being carried out by the owner at the property and/or miscommunication. In all, she had hired a truck 3 times, on 18 February 2023, 8 March 2023 and 15 March 2023 and provided a copy of the booking to confirm this. She said although she tried to make arrangements, she found it difficult as the owner did not co-operate.
The Tribunal was faced with unresolved conflicting views. Essentially, the landlord is entitled to vacant possession of the property at the end of the tenancy. This means, a property that is free of the tenant’s possessions and rubbish.
While I have sympathy for the tenant’s position it is of her own making in that she did not provide vacant possession on 7 December 2022. The tenant’s failure to remove the rubbish at the end of the tenancy means she is liable for the cost/loss incurred by the landlord for rubbish removal. I am satisfied that the tenant should pay for the cost of rubbish removal/bin hire.
Given the conflicting views and lack of corroborating evidence, I am not in a position to determine whether costs should be deducted due to the cancellation of trucks hired to remove the tenant’s goods.

Is the landlord entitled to a disposal of goods order?

The landlord has applied for the disposal of goods the tenant left at the premises at the end of the tenancy.
Section 62(2) RTA provides that if the tenant leaves on the premises goods that are neither foodstuffs nor other perishable goods, the landlord must, immediately after taking possession of the premises, make all reasonable efforts to contact the tenant and to agree with the tenant on a period within which the tenant is to collect the goods.
Section 62(3) provides that if the landlord is unable to contact the tenant or to agree on a period with the tenant, or if the tenant fails to collect the goods within the agreed period, the landlord must ensure that any personal documents belonging to the tenant are stored securely and must deal with the other goods either— (a) in accordance with section 62A; or (b) by securing them in safe storage and by applying to the Tribunal in accordance with section 62B.
Section 62A provides that a landlord may deal with the goods to which section 62(3) applies, other than personal documents belonging to the tenant, by making all reasonable efforts to assess the market value of those goods. If that assessment under subsection indicates that any of the goods have a value below the cost of storing, transporting, and selling them, the landlord may immediately dispose of those goods in any way the landlord thinks fit.
If the assessment indicates that any of the goods have a value above the cost of storing, transporting, and selling them, the landlord must secure those goods in safe storage for not less than 35 days from the date on which the landlord first took possession of those goods.
Section 62A(5) states that if before the landlord disposes of the goods under subsection the tenant claims the goods and any personal documents belonging to the tenant or claims either the goods or the documents: (a) the landlord may require the tenant to pay the landlord’s actual and reasonable costs arising out of the storage of the goods; and (b) the landlord must release to the tenant any goods and personal documents claimed by the tenant, subject to payment of any costs required under paragraph (a); and (c) the tenant must give the landlord a receipt for any goods and personal documents released to the tenant.
If, after the period of 35 days specified in section 62(3), the goods or any personal documents belonging to the tenant remain unclaimed, the landlord must— (a) continue to secure those goods and personal documents in safe storage to await any claims by the tenant; or (b) do the following: (i) take any personal documents belonging to the tenant to the nearest Police station and obtain a receipt for them from a Police employee; and (ii) sell the other goods by public auction or by private contract at a reasonable market price.
The tenant agreed at the previous hearing that there were no longer any outstanding goods to be collected and she had all the items she wanted. However, the tenant raised that she was missing items.
In these circumstances, it is appropriate to allow a further and final short period for the tenant until 5pm Friday 13 October 2023 to remove her goods from the premises, given there is now over 10 months since the tenancy ended.
Failing the tenant uplifting her possessions by that time, the landlord is entitled to dispose of having made all reasonable steps to assess their market value.
If the tenant’s goods’ value is less than the costs of transporting and selling them, then the landlord may immediately dispose of the tenant’s goods as the landlord thinks fit.
However, if the value of the tenant’s goods are more than the costs of storing, transporting and selling them, then the landlord must sell them and may charge the tenant for the actual and reasonable costs of storage and their sale.
The landlord may dispose of any goods that have no saleable value.
As the landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim, I must order the other party to reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4479921 — Cleanliness at 44 Lavinia Crescent, Mangere East, Auckland 2024

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4479921 — Cleanliness at 44 Lavinia Crescent, Mangere East, Auckland 2024

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Is the landlord entitled to a disposal of goods order?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Is the landlord entitled to a disposal of goods order?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions