What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4515511?

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

How much money was awarded in case 4515511?

Bailiff'S Charges: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Meth Testing: 31.1.23: $752.10 awarded to landlord; Meth Testing: 8.1.23: $228.85 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $287.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,092.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $182.85 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $5,680.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,012.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4515511?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4515511?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9189337-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4515511?

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

How much money was awarded in case 4515511?

Bailiff'S Charges: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Meth Testing: 31.1.23: $752.10 awarded to landlord; Meth Testing: 8.1.23: $228.85 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $287.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,092.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $182.85 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $5,680.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,012.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4515511?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4515511?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9189337-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 3, 28 Princes Street, Otahuhu, Auckland 1062 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4515511 — Rent arrears

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4515511 — net $9,456.24 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 10.1.23	$5,680.00	Rent arrears to 10.1.23
Rubbish removal	$1,012.00	Rubbish removal
Lock/key replacement	$287.50	Lock/key replacement
Meth testing: 8.1.23	$228.85	Meth testing: 8.1.23
Meth testing: 31.1.23	$752.10	Meth testing: 31.1.23
Repairs to front door (TT order 4423961	$1,092.50	Repairs to front door (TT order 4423961
Bailiff's charges	$200.00	Bailiff's charges
Repairs to sliding door	$182.85	Repairs to sliding door
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$9,456.24
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$9,456.24

Only the landlord, represented by Ms Dewan and Ms Bartley, attended the hearing. The tenant was notified but did not attend, and the hearing proceeded in her absence.

The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. The bond was paid to the landlord following an order issued by the Tribunal on 14 December 2022.

How much is owed for rent?

This tenancy began on 1 September 2022. The Tribunal terminated the tenancy on 16 December 2022, although there was provision for the tenant to remain if the rent arrears were paid by this date. The tenant did not pay the arrears and the tenancy was effectively terminated. The landlord’s evidence is that the tenant remained in possession beyond this date, and rent is sought until the landlord regained possession, on 10 January 2023. The landlord has explained that there were delays in being able to enforce the Tribunal order terminating the tenancy due to court closure during the Christmas/New Year period. Supporting evidence has been provided, including oral, photographic, and documentary evidence.

The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.

The landlord also incurred costs to enforce the eviction ($200.00). While the bailiff was no longer required, the landlord was unable to obtain reimbursement of this cost. An invoice has been provided. This amount is also awarded above.

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) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the RTA).

The landlord claims the tenant has been in breach of the above obligations and seeks the following costs: • Rubbish removal • Key/lock replacement

The landlord has established that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. At the end of the tenancy there were large items, including furniture, appliances and general rubbish left behind, which the landlord had to arrange for removal and disposal. The landlord gave oral evidence and produced photographic evidence of the condition of the premises at the end of the tenancy, and before the tenancy began. Detailed inspection reports and an invoice for rubbish removal costs ($1,012.00) have also been produced.

The tenant did not return the keys. The landlord had to change the locks and keys, for security reasons, before the premises could be re-let. The relevant invoice was produced. The landlord is awarded $287.50 for the cost of changing the front door lock and keys.

The amounts ordered are proved. General principles regarding responsibility for damage

The landlord claims compensation for damage. To be successful, 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 of the 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. In this case, the landlord became aware of the damage after 27 August 2019, therefore, the amended provisions will apply.

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) of the 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) of the 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) of the 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) of the 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.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

I am satisfied that the following damage was caused during the tenancy: • Front door damage: the repair cost for this damage ($1,092.50) was previously awarded by the Tribunal and remains unpaid. The Tribunal was satisfied that the tenant was liable for this damage. • Sliding door damage: the landlord has produced photographic and oral evidence, and an invoice for the repair costs ($182.85).

The above damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The amounts ordered are proved.

In making these awards the principle of betterment has been taken into account, so the landlord is returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached their obligations, and is not better or worse off. Depreciation has also been considered.

The landlord also incurred costs for methamphetamine testing, conducted over two separate days. Evidence has been produced showing the results of this testing. The landlord states that there was a need for remedial work arising from it. Having considered the landlord’s evidence, I am satisfied that the tenant is liable for the two invoices, as awarded above. Filing fee

As the landlord has been successful, the tenant is to pay the landlord’s filing fee of $20.44.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4515511 — net $9,456.24 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 10.1.23	$5,680.00	Rent arrears to 10.1.23
Rubbish removal	$1,012.00	Rubbish removal
Lock/key replacement	$287.50	Lock/key replacement
Meth testing: 8.1.23	$228.85	Meth testing: 8.1.23
Meth testing: 31.1.23	$752.10	Meth testing: 31.1.23
Repairs to front door (TT order 4423961	$1,092.50	Repairs to front door (TT order 4423961
Bailiff's charges	$200.00	Bailiff's charges
Repairs to sliding door	$182.85	Repairs to sliding door
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$9,456.24
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$9,456.24

Order

No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.
Topateauri David must pay Barfoot & Thompson Limited as agent for Irene Loh, $9,456.24 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.

Reasons

Only the landlord, represented by Ms Dewan and Ms Bartley, attended the hearing. The tenant was notified but did not attend, and the hearing proceeded in her absence.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. The bond was paid to the landlord following an order issued by the Tribunal on 14 December 2022.

How much is owed for rent?

This tenancy began on 1 September 2022. The Tribunal terminated the tenancy on 16 December 2022, although there was provision for the tenant to remain if the rent arrears were paid by this date. The tenant did not pay the arrears and the tenancy was effectively terminated. The landlord’s evidence is that the tenant remained in possession beyond this date, and rent is sought until the landlord regained possession, on 10 January 2023. The landlord has explained that there were delays in being able to enforce the Tribunal order terminating the tenancy due to court closure during the Christmas/New Year period. Supporting evidence has been provided, including oral, photographic, and documentary evidence.
The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.
The landlord also incurred costs to enforce the eviction ($200.00). While the bailiff was no longer required, the landlord was unable to obtain reimbursement of this cost. An invoice has been provided. This amount is also awarded above.

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) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the RTA).
The landlord claims the tenant has been in breach of the above obligations and seeks the following costs: • Rubbish removal • Key/lock replacement
The landlord has established that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. At the end of the tenancy there were large items, including furniture, appliances and general rubbish left behind, which the landlord had to arrange for removal and disposal. The landlord gave oral evidence and produced photographic evidence of the condition of the premises at the end of the tenancy, and before the tenancy began. Detailed inspection reports and an invoice for rubbish removal costs ($1,012.00) have also been produced.
The tenant did not return the keys. The landlord had to change the locks and keys, for security reasons, before the premises could be re-let. The relevant invoice was produced. The landlord is awarded $287.50 for the cost of changing the front door lock and keys.
The amounts ordered are proved. General principles regarding responsibility for damage
The landlord claims compensation for damage. To be successful, 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 of the 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. In this case, the landlord became aware of the damage after 27 August 2019, therefore, the amended provisions will apply.
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) of the 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) of the 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) of the 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) of the 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.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

I am satisfied that the following damage was caused during the tenancy: • Front door damage: the repair cost for this damage ($1,092.50) was previously awarded by the Tribunal and remains unpaid. The Tribunal was satisfied that the tenant was liable for this damage. • Sliding door damage: the landlord has produced photographic and oral evidence, and an invoice for the repair costs ($182.85).
The above damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The amounts ordered are proved.
In making these awards the principle of betterment has been taken into account, so the landlord is returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached their obligations, and is not better or worse off. Depreciation has also been considered.
The landlord also incurred costs for methamphetamine testing, conducted over two separate days. Evidence has been produced showing the results of this testing. The landlord states that there was a need for remedial work arising from it. Having considered the landlord’s evidence, I am satisfied that the tenant is liable for the two invoices, as awarded above. Filing fee
As the landlord has been successful, the tenant is to pay the landlord’s filing fee of $20.44.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4515511 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 3, 28 Princes Street, Otahuhu, Auckland 1062

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4515511 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 3, 28 Princes Street, Otahuhu, Auckland 1062

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