What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4609029?

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

How much money was awarded in case 4609029?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $3,060.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Carpet: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $100.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4609029?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4609029?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9269422-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4609029?

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

How much money was awarded in case 4609029?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $3,060.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Carpet: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $100.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4609029?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4609029?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9269422-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

4 Skye Street, Levin, Levin 5510 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4609029 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4609029 — net $3,540.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$3,060.00	Rent arrears
Rubbish removal	$100.00	Rubbish removal
Repairs	$1,000.00	Repairs
Replace furnishings: carpet	$1,000.00	Replace furnishings: carpet
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,540.44
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,540.44

Order

No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.
The tenancy is terminated immediately.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,640.00 (5446733-007) to Brian Willis immediately.
Rebecca Gay must pay Brian Willis $3,540.44 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below. DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears$3,060.00 Rubbish removal$100.00 Repairs$1,000.00 Replace furnishings: carpet$1,000.00 Filing fee reimbursement$20.44 Total award$5,180.44 Bond$1,640.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$3,540.44

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing.
The tenant did not attend the hearing.
The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for abandonment, rent arrears, compensation and refund of the bond.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

The Tribunal may terminate the tenancy where the premises have been abandoned and rent is in arrear at the hearing date. See section 61 Residential Tenancies Act 1986. A tenancy is abandoned where the tenant leaves the premises without reasonable excuse, not intending to return or to meet their obligations, and fails to notify the landlord.
On 20 June 2023 the landlord became aware (or ought to have been aware) that the tenant had abandoned the premises. The landlord went to the property to hand deliver a rent arrears notice. He advised that on looking through the windows it was apparent that the tenant had vacated because all of her possessions had been removed. He confirmed that gave notice under section 48(2B) RTA by attaching a notice to the door of the property. He gave evidence that upon the subsequent inspection, it was clear that the tenant had vacated without giving notice.
Because the premises have been abandoned, and rent is in arrear, the tenancy is terminated immediately.

How much does the tenant owe?

The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy. The amount ordered includes four weeks’ rent in lieu of notice.

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 and remove all rubbish. 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 landlord provided photographic evidence that the tenant did not remove all rubbish.
The amount ordered for rubbish removal is 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 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. There were holes in the walls of three bedrooms. b. A closet door and a bedroom door were damaged. c. The carpet in three bedrooms had been damaged by burn marks. The landlord suggested that cigarette butts appeared to have been dropped on the floor. d. Vinyl in the laundry had been damaged by an overflow of water.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The damage to the walls was deliberate because items were intentionally affixed to one wall, other holes and the damage to the doors were caused intentionally by blunt force. The damage to the carpet was extensive and was most likely caused over a period of time. It amounts to intentional damage.
The landlord’s evidence of the damage to the laundry vinyl has not persuaded me that it was any more than fair wear and tear. The claim in relation to the vinyl is dismissed.
The amounts ordered are proved.
I have taken into account 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 taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.
The landlord advised that the carpet was at least five years old. The IRD depreciation schedule in IR 265 indicates that carpet in a residential tenancy has a life expectancy of eight years. The landlord advised that neither the carpet nor the vinyl had yet been replaced and provided a quote for their replacement.
I accept that the landlord has suffered loss. The quantification of that loss is not an exact science. I have an awarded a sum which I believe is adequate compensation.
At the hearing the landlord withdrew his claims in relation to damage to a garage window, external weatherboards, the laundry glass frame and exemplary damages.
Because Brian Willis has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4609029 — net $3,540.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$3,060.00	Rent arrears
Rubbish removal	$100.00	Rubbish removal
Repairs	$1,000.00	Repairs
Replace furnishings: carpet	$1,000.00	Replace furnishings: carpet
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,540.44
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,540.44

Order

No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.
The tenancy is terminated immediately.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,640.00 (5446733-007) to Brian Willis immediately.
Rebecca Gay must pay Brian Willis $3,540.44 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below. DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears$3,060.00 Rubbish removal$100.00 Repairs$1,000.00 Replace furnishings: carpet$1,000.00 Filing fee reimbursement$20.44 Total award$5,180.44 Bond$1,640.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$3,540.44

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing.
The tenant did not attend the hearing.
The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for abandonment, rent arrears, compensation and refund of the bond.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

The Tribunal may terminate the tenancy where the premises have been abandoned and rent is in arrear at the hearing date. See section 61 Residential Tenancies Act 1986. A tenancy is abandoned where the tenant leaves the premises without reasonable excuse, not intending to return or to meet their obligations, and fails to notify the landlord.
On 20 June 2023 the landlord became aware (or ought to have been aware) that the tenant had abandoned the premises. The landlord went to the property to hand deliver a rent arrears notice. He advised that on looking through the windows it was apparent that the tenant had vacated because all of her possessions had been removed. He confirmed that gave notice under section 48(2B) RTA by attaching a notice to the door of the property. He gave evidence that upon the subsequent inspection, it was clear that the tenant had vacated without giving notice.
Because the premises have been abandoned, and rent is in arrear, the tenancy is terminated immediately.

How much does the tenant owe?

The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy. The amount ordered includes four weeks’ rent in lieu of notice.

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 and remove all rubbish. 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 landlord provided photographic evidence that the tenant did not remove all rubbish.
The amount ordered for rubbish removal is 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 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. There were holes in the walls of three bedrooms. b. A closet door and a bedroom door were damaged. c. The carpet in three bedrooms had been damaged by burn marks. The landlord suggested that cigarette butts appeared to have been dropped on the floor. d. Vinyl in the laundry had been damaged by an overflow of water.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The damage to the walls was deliberate because items were intentionally affixed to one wall, other holes and the damage to the doors were caused intentionally by blunt force. The damage to the carpet was extensive and was most likely caused over a period of time. It amounts to intentional damage.
The landlord’s evidence of the damage to the laundry vinyl has not persuaded me that it was any more than fair wear and tear. The claim in relation to the vinyl is dismissed.
The amounts ordered are proved.
I have taken into account 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 taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.
The landlord advised that the carpet was at least five years old. The IRD depreciation schedule in IR 265 indicates that carpet in a residential tenancy has a life expectancy of eight years. The landlord advised that neither the carpet nor the vinyl had yet been replaced and provided a quote for their replacement.
I accept that the landlord has suffered loss. The quantification of that loss is not an exact science. I have an awarded a sum which I believe is adequate compensation.
At the hearing the landlord withdrew his claims in relation to damage to a garage window, external weatherboards, the laundry glass frame and exemplary damages.
Because Brian Willis has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4609029 — Rent arrears at 4 Skye Street, Levin, Levin 5510

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4609029 — Rent arrears at 4 Skye Street, Levin, Levin 5510

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

How much does the tenant owe?

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

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

How much does the tenant owe?

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

Frequently asked questions