How much money was awarded in case 4619512?

Property Damage: $437.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $1,250.00 awarded to landlord; Cockroach Treatment X 2: $470.35 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lawn Mowing: $287.50 awarded to landlord; Move Fridge (Maggot Infested: $60.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $330.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $2,480.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,880.71 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $299.16 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $410.00 awarded to landlord; Skip Hire 24.2.23; 31.7.23: $860.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $604.35 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4619512?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4619512?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9283245-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 4619512?

Property Damage: $437.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $1,250.00 awarded to landlord; Cockroach Treatment X 2: $470.35 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lawn Mowing: $287.50 awarded to landlord; Move Fridge (Maggot Infested: $60.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $330.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $2,480.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,880.71 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $299.16 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $410.00 awarded to landlord; Skip Hire 24.2.23; 31.7.23: $860.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $604.35 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4619512?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4619512?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9283245-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

309 Beach Haven Road, Birkdale, Auckland 0626 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4619512 — Property damage

Q: What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4619512?

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

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4619512 — net $7,029.51 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 11.8.23	$1,880.71	Rent arrears to 11.8.23
Water rates	$604.35	Water rates
Repairs: window (repaired 13.2.23	$299.16	Repairs: window (repaired 13.2.23
Skip hire 24.2.23; 31.7.23	$860.00	Skip hire 24.2.23; 31.7.23
Rubbish removal and replace front door lock	$410.00	Rubbish removal and replace front door lock
Lawn mowing	$287.50	Lawn mowing
Cockroach treatment x 2	$470.35	Cockroach treatment x 2
Move fridge (maggot infested	$60.00	Move fridge (maggot infested
Repair damage to walls, doors, kitchen cupboard and window latches	$330.00	Repair damage to walls, doors, kitchen cupboard and window latches
Cleaning	$1,250.00	Cleaning
__________________________________________________________________________________ 46195122 Repairs: lounge windows	$437.00	__________________________________________________________________________________ 46195122 Repairs: lounge windows
Carpet replacement (limited to 4 weeks' rent equivalent	$2,480.00	Carpet replacement (limited to 4 weeks' rent equivalent
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$7,029.51
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$7,029.51

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4619512 — net $7,029.51 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.

Claim

Landlord

Tenant

Reason

Rent arrears to 11.8.23

$1,880.71

Rent arrears to 11.8.23

Water rates

$604.35

Water rates

Repairs: window (repaired 13.2.23

$299.16

Repairs: window (repaired 13.2.23

Skip hire 24.2.23; 31.7.23

$860.00

Skip hire 24.2.23; 31.7.23

Rubbish removal and replace front door lock

$410.00

Rubbish removal and replace front door lock

Lawn mowing

$287.50

Lawn mowing

Cockroach treatment x 2

$470.35

Cockroach treatment x 2

Move fridge (maggot infested

$60.00

Move fridge (maggot infested

Repair damage to walls, doors, kitchen cupboard and window latches

$330.00

Repair damage to walls, doors, kitchen cupboard and window latches

Cleaning

$1,250.00

Cleaning

__________________________________________________________________________________ 46195122 Repairs: lounge windows

$437.00

__________________________________________________________________________________ 46195122 Repairs: lounge windows

Carpet replacement (limited to 4 weeks' rent equivalent

$2,480.00

Carpet replacement (limited to 4 weeks' rent equivalent

Filing fee reimbursement

$20.44

Filing fee reimbursement

Net award

$7,029.51

Total payable by Tenant to Landlord

$7,029.51

Order

No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.

The tenancy of Mareta Koto at 309 Beach Haven Road, Birkdale, Auckland 0626 is terminated, and possession is granted to NZPRO Property Management Ltd - LJ Hooker Mount Albert Ltd as agent for Anugraha Properties Ltd, immediately.

Mareta Koto must pay NZPRO Property Management Ltd - LJ Hooker Mount Albert Ltd as agent for Anugraha Properties Ltd $7,029.51 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,360.00 (5860313-001) to NZPRO Property Management Ltd - LJ Hooker Mount Albert Ltd as agent for Anugraha Properties Ltd immediately.

Reasons

Mr Jeet and Ms Woo represented the landlord. The tenant did not attend the hearing.

The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for abandonment, rent arrears, water rates, compensation for cleaning and repairs, the filing fee 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 (RTA). 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 19 July 2021 the landlord became aware that the tenant had abandoned the premises. An inspection showed that the tenants had left the premises. The premises were not secure and there was rubbish strewn about.

The landlord secured the premises and removed rotting food but otherwise has not taken possession, so the tenant remains liable for rent.

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 of rent owing up to today and the amount of water rates (less the fixed rate charges) that are outstanding.

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) RTA.

The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The amount of rubbish to be removed was considerable.

The premises had to be treated for cockroach infestation twice.

The tenant did not return all the keys.

The amounts ordered are proved by invoices and photos.

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: the carpets are so badly stained they must be replaced. The landlord is insured but the insurer will apply so many excesses to the claim for carpet replacement that a claim will not be indemnified. The amount awarded for carpet replacement is therefore limited to the equivalent of 4 weeks’ rent.

There was damage to door and walls, a kitchen cupboard and window latches. Some windows were broken.

Mr Jeet gave evidence that some damage occurred during the tenancy. Although the tenant said they would repair the damage they did not. He said the tenant also agreed to replace the carpets.

The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The amounts ordered are proved by invoices, quotations, photos, and by the evidence Mr Jeet gave at the hearing.

As the application is successful, the tenant must pay the landlord’s Tribunal filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4619512 — net $7,029.51 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 11.8.23	$1,880.71	Rent arrears to 11.8.23
Water rates	$604.35	Water rates
Repairs: window (repaired 13.2.23	$299.16	Repairs: window (repaired 13.2.23
Skip hire 24.2.23; 31.7.23	$860.00	Skip hire 24.2.23; 31.7.23
Rubbish removal and replace front door lock	$410.00	Rubbish removal and replace front door lock
Lawn mowing	$287.50	Lawn mowing
Cockroach treatment x 2	$470.35	Cockroach treatment x 2
Move fridge (maggot infested	$60.00	Move fridge (maggot infested
Repair damage to walls, doors, kitchen cupboard and window latches	$330.00	Repair damage to walls, doors, kitchen cupboard and window latches
Cleaning	$1,250.00	Cleaning
__________________________________________________________________________________ 46195122 Repairs: lounge windows	$437.00	__________________________________________________________________________________ 46195122 Repairs: lounge windows
Carpet replacement (limited to 4 weeks' rent equivalent	$2,480.00	Carpet replacement (limited to 4 weeks' rent equivalent
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$7,029.51
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$7,029.51

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4619512 — net $7,029.51 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.

Claim

Landlord

Tenant

Reason

Rent arrears to 11.8.23

$1,880.71

Rent arrears to 11.8.23

Water rates

$604.35

Water rates

Repairs: window (repaired 13.2.23

$299.16

Repairs: window (repaired 13.2.23

Skip hire 24.2.23; 31.7.23

$860.00

Skip hire 24.2.23; 31.7.23

Rubbish removal and replace front door lock

$410.00

Rubbish removal and replace front door lock

Lawn mowing

$287.50

Lawn mowing

Cockroach treatment x 2

$470.35

Cockroach treatment x 2

Move fridge (maggot infested

$60.00

Move fridge (maggot infested

Repair damage to walls, doors, kitchen cupboard and window latches

$330.00

Repair damage to walls, doors, kitchen cupboard and window latches

Cleaning

$1,250.00

Cleaning

__________________________________________________________________________________ 46195122 Repairs: lounge windows

$437.00

__________________________________________________________________________________ 46195122 Repairs: lounge windows

Carpet replacement (limited to 4 weeks' rent equivalent

$2,480.00

Carpet replacement (limited to 4 weeks' rent equivalent

Filing fee reimbursement

$20.44

Filing fee reimbursement

Net award

$7,029.51

Total payable by Tenant to Landlord

$7,029.51

Order

No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.
The tenancy of Mareta Koto at 309 Beach Haven Road, Birkdale, Auckland 0626 is terminated, and possession is granted to NZPRO Property Management Ltd - LJ Hooker Mount Albert Ltd as agent for Anugraha Properties Ltd, immediately.
Mareta Koto must pay NZPRO Property Management Ltd - LJ Hooker Mount Albert Ltd as agent for Anugraha Properties Ltd $7,029.51 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,360.00 (5860313-001) to NZPRO Property Management Ltd - LJ Hooker Mount Albert Ltd as agent for Anugraha Properties Ltd immediately.

Reasons

Mr Jeet and Ms Woo represented the landlord. The tenant did not attend the hearing.
The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for abandonment, rent arrears, water rates, compensation for cleaning and repairs, the filing fee 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 (RTA). 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 19 July 2021 the landlord became aware that the tenant had abandoned the premises. An inspection showed that the tenants had left the premises. The premises were not secure and there was rubbish strewn about.
The landlord secured the premises and removed rotting food but otherwise has not taken possession, so the tenant remains liable for rent.
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 of rent owing up to today and the amount of water rates (less the fixed rate charges) that are outstanding.

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) RTA.
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The amount of rubbish to be removed was considerable.
The premises had to be treated for cockroach infestation twice.
The tenant did not return all the keys.
The amounts ordered are proved by invoices and photos.

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: the carpets are so badly stained they must be replaced. The landlord is insured but the insurer will apply so many excesses to the claim for carpet replacement that a claim will not be indemnified. The amount awarded for carpet replacement is therefore limited to the equivalent of 4 weeks’ rent.
There was damage to door and walls, a kitchen cupboard and window latches. Some windows were broken.
Mr Jeet gave evidence that some damage occurred during the tenancy. Although the tenant said they would repair the damage they did not. He said the tenant also agreed to replace the carpets.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved by invoices, quotations, photos, and by the evidence Mr Jeet gave at the hearing.
As the application is successful, the tenant must pay the landlord’s Tribunal filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4619512 — Property damage at 309 Beach Haven Road, Birkdale, Auckland 0626

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4619512 — Property damage at 309 Beach Haven Road, Birkdale, Auckland 0626

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions