What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4628789?

The tribunal order states: Katie Jordan to pay Eren Limited (as agent for Phillip and Elizabeth Holt)

How much money was awarded in case 4628789?

Compensation: $125.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4628789?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4628789?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9771271-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4628789?

The tribunal order states: Katie Jordan to pay Eren Limited (as agent for Phillip and Elizabeth Holt)

How much money was awarded in case 4628789?

Compensation: $125.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4628789?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4628789?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9771271-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

4 Sierra Avenue, Kamo, Whangarei 0112 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4628789 — Tenancy dispute

Reasons

Background

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4628789 — net $145.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Compensation - curtains	$125.00	Compensation - curtains
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	21. The landlord has been successful in this application, and I will award the landlord the filing fee of $20.44.
Net award	$145.44
Bond	$287.50
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$145.44

The tenancy ended on 24 March 2023.

The claim seeks the cost of replacing the curtains in a bedroom.

The hearing took place in Whangarei on 15 December 2023. Both parties attended the hearing. Ms Clarijs represented the landlord. Findings

The claim seeks compensation for replacing the curtains in a bedroom on the grounds that one of the curtains had dark stains at the bottom of it.

Ms Jordan questioned whether the damage occurred during her tenancy. She did not notice the damage, and she did not know what could have caused the damage.

Ms Clarijs provided two photographs from the beginning of the tenancy. In one of the photographs the relevant part of the curtain is obscured by the property manager’s hand. The other photograph is not a close-up, and the condition of the bottom of the curtain is not clear on the printed version of the photograph. Ms Clarijs provided a digital version so that I could magnify the relevant part of the curtain.

The picture quality is not perfect at magnification, and the curtains are dark which makes the stains less visible, but I am satisfied that the photograph is clear enough to establish that the stains were not present at the start of the tenancy.

Therefore, I find that the damage occurred during Ms Jordan’s tenancy. The damage is beyond fair wear and tear.

Ms Clarijs submitted that the nature of the staining was such that it was not worth attempting to clean the curtains. The claim seeks the cost of replacing the curtains, which totalled $250.00.

I accept that the black stains, which appear to be ink or something similar, could not be removed by cleaning.

The claim for replacement is fair and reasonable.

The replacement curtains are new. The existing curtains were not. Depreciation must be factored in when considering the tenant’s liability.

Ms Clarijs submitted that the curtains were purchased and installed shortly before the start of Ms Jordan’s tenancy in February 2021.

Ms Jordan disputed this. Ms Jordan provided a photograph that she found on the internet, taken when the property was on the market in August 2017. The photograph shows what appear to be the same curtains in this bedroom.

Ms Jordan also referred to a photograph of the backing of these curtains taken at the entry inspection, which shows some UV damage to the backing of the curtains.

The evidence is persuasive.

If the curtains date back to 2017 they were six years old at the end of the tenancy.

The IRD applies a standard life expectancy of 8 years for curtains. The life expectancy of any chattel can vary depending on a wide range of factors.

The curtains appeared to be in good condition at the beginning of the tenancy.

Having regard to these factors I will apply depreciation of 50% to the replacement cost claimed. Filing fee, bond

The landlord has been successful in this application, and I will award the landlord the filing fee of $20.44.

There is $287.50 of bond still with the Bond Centre.

The landlord will receive $145.44 from the bond. The balance will be released to the tenant.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4628789 — net $145.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Compensation - curtains	$125.00	Compensation - curtains
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	21. The landlord has been successful in this application, and I will award the landlord the filing fee of $20.44.
Net award	$145.44
Bond	$287.50
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$145.44

Order

Katie Jordan to pay Eren Limited (as agent for Phillip and Elizabeth Holt) $145.44 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $287.50 (3392835-005) immediately apportioned as follows: Eren Limited: $145.44 Katie Jordan: $142.06

Reasons

Background

The tenancy ended on 24 March 2023.
The claim seeks the cost of replacing the curtains in a bedroom.
The hearing took place in Whangarei on 15 December 2023. Both parties attended the hearing. Ms Clarijs represented the landlord. Findings
The claim seeks compensation for replacing the curtains in a bedroom on the grounds that one of the curtains had dark stains at the bottom of it.
Ms Jordan questioned whether the damage occurred during her tenancy. She did not notice the damage, and she did not know what could have caused the damage.
Ms Clarijs provided two photographs from the beginning of the tenancy. In one of the photographs the relevant part of the curtain is obscured by the property manager’s hand. The other photograph is not a close-up, and the condition of the bottom of the curtain is not clear on the printed version of the photograph. Ms Clarijs provided a digital version so that I could magnify the relevant part of the curtain.
The picture quality is not perfect at magnification, and the curtains are dark which makes the stains less visible, but I am satisfied that the photograph is clear enough to establish that the stains were not present at the start of the tenancy.
Therefore, I find that the damage occurred during Ms Jordan’s tenancy. The damage is beyond fair wear and tear.
Ms Clarijs submitted that the nature of the staining was such that it was not worth attempting to clean the curtains. The claim seeks the cost of replacing the curtains, which totalled $250.00.
I accept that the black stains, which appear to be ink or something similar, could not be removed by cleaning.
The claim for replacement is fair and reasonable.
The replacement curtains are new. The existing curtains were not. Depreciation must be factored in when considering the tenant’s liability.
Ms Clarijs submitted that the curtains were purchased and installed shortly before the start of Ms Jordan’s tenancy in February 2021.
Ms Jordan disputed this. Ms Jordan provided a photograph that she found on the internet, taken when the property was on the market in August 2017. The photograph shows what appear to be the same curtains in this bedroom.
Ms Jordan also referred to a photograph of the backing of these curtains taken at the entry inspection, which shows some UV damage to the backing of the curtains.
The evidence is persuasive.
If the curtains date back to 2017 they were six years old at the end of the tenancy.
The IRD applies a standard life expectancy of 8 years for curtains. The life expectancy of any chattel can vary depending on a wide range of factors.
The curtains appeared to be in good condition at the beginning of the tenancy.
Having regard to these factors I will apply depreciation of 50% to the replacement cost claimed. Filing fee, bond
The landlord has been successful in this application, and I will award the landlord the filing fee of $20.44.
There is $287.50 of bond still with the Bond Centre.
The landlord will receive $145.44 from the bond. The balance will be released to the tenant.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4628789 — Tenancy dispute at 4 Sierra Avenue, Kamo, Whangarei 0112

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4628789 — Tenancy dispute at 4 Sierra Avenue, Kamo, Whangarei 0112

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions