What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4628909?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Paul Opeta Vasega and Lynette Tauamo Jr Evile at Unit/Flat 2,

How much money was awarded in case 4628909?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $764.75 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $4,165.00 awarded to landlord; Water Charges: $156.42 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4628909?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4628909?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9273844-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4628909?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Paul Opeta Vasega and Lynette Tauamo Jr Evile at Unit/Flat 2,

How much money was awarded in case 4628909?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $764.75 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $4,165.00 awarded to landlord; Water Charges: $156.42 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4628909?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4628909?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9273844-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 2, 22A Tomo Street, New Lynn, Auckland 0600 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4628909 — Rent arrears

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4628909. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$4,165.00	Rent arrears
Water charges	$156.42	Water charges
Cost of wall repair	$764.75	Cost of wall repair
Application filing fee	$20.44	Application filing fee

The tenancy of Paul Opeta Vasega and Lynette Tauamo Jr Evile at Unit/Flat 2, 22A Tomo Street, New Lynn, Auckland 0600 is terminated, and possession is granted to Crockers Property Management Limited immediately.

Paul Opeta Vasega and Lynette Tauamo Jr Evile to pay Crockers Property Management Limited $X immediately, calculated as follows: DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears$4,165.00 Water charges$156.42 Cost of wall repair$764.75 Application filing fee$20.44 Total award$5,106.61 Minus Bond$2,280.00 Tenant to pay$2,826.61

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,380.00 (6135723-004) to Crockers Property Management Limited immediately.

Reasons

The Landlord attended the hearing by phone. The Tenants did not answer when called.

The Landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the tenant’s obligations, rent and water charge arrears, compensation for wall damage and refund of the bond.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Where a landlord applies to terminate for breach, and rent is at least 21 days in arrears on the hearing date, the Tribunal must terminate the tenancy. See sections 55 and 56(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Rent is at least 21 days in arrears at the hearing date. The tenancy is terminated.

How much does the tenant owe?

The landlord provided rent records and water charge invoices which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy: a. Rent arrears to 9 August 2023: $4,165.00 b. Water charges: $156.42

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.

A wall was damaged during the tenancy. The Landlord says the tenants cannot agree which one of them was responsible for the hole in the wall.

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

The cost of repairing the wall is $764.75. The Landlord has provided a quote, which I approve.

I have considered improvements and wear and tear. The landlord should only be put back to where they would have been if the tenant met their responsibilities, neither gaining nor losing. The wall was in good condition at the start of the tenancy and should have lasted for some years without any need for a repair like this.

The amounts ordered are proved.

Because Crockers Property Management Limited has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4628909. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$4,165.00	Rent arrears
Water charges	$156.42	Water charges
Cost of wall repair	$764.75	Cost of wall repair
Application filing fee	$20.44	Application filing fee

Order

The tenancy of Paul Opeta Vasega and Lynette Tauamo Jr Evile at Unit/Flat 2, 22A Tomo Street, New Lynn, Auckland 0600 is terminated, and possession is granted to Crockers Property Management Limited immediately.
Paul Opeta Vasega and Lynette Tauamo Jr Evile to pay Crockers Property Management Limited $X immediately, calculated as follows: DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears$4,165.00 Water charges$156.42 Cost of wall repair$764.75 Application filing fee$20.44 Total award$5,106.61 Minus Bond$2,280.00 Tenant to pay$2,826.61
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,380.00 (6135723-004) to Crockers Property Management Limited immediately.

Reasons

The Landlord attended the hearing by phone. The Tenants did not answer when called.
The Landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the tenant’s obligations, rent and water charge arrears, compensation for wall damage and refund of the bond.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Where a landlord applies to terminate for breach, and rent is at least 21 days in arrears on the hearing date, the Tribunal must terminate the tenancy. See sections 55 and 56(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Rent is at least 21 days in arrears at the hearing date. The tenancy is terminated.

How much does the tenant owe?

The landlord provided rent records and water charge invoices which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy: a. Rent arrears to 9 August 2023: $4,165.00 b. Water charges: $156.42

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.
A wall was damaged during the tenancy. The Landlord says the tenants cannot agree which one of them was responsible for the hole in the wall.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The cost of repairing the wall is $764.75. The Landlord has provided a quote, which I approve.
I have considered improvements and wear and tear. The landlord should only be put back to where they would have been if the tenant met their responsibilities, neither gaining nor losing. The wall was in good condition at the start of the tenancy and should have lasted for some years without any need for a repair like this.
The amounts ordered are proved.
Because Crockers Property Management Limited has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4628909 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 2, 22A Tomo Street, New Lynn, Auckland 0600

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4628909 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 2, 22A Tomo Street, New Lynn, Auckland 0600

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

How much does the tenant owe?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

How much does the tenant owe?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions