What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4650649?

The tribunal order states: Santana Toma must pay Boutique Rentals Bop Limited as agent for Landlord

How much money was awarded in case 4650649?

Cleaning: $287.50 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $1,380.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Garage Remote: $115.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,250.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $955.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $54.19 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4650649?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4650649?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9673949-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4650649?

The tribunal order states: Santana Toma must pay Boutique Rentals Bop Limited as agent for Landlord

How much money was awarded in case 4650649?

Cleaning: $287.50 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $1,380.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Garage Remote: $115.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,250.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $955.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $54.19 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4650649?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4650649?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9673949-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

49 Ridge Drive, Omokoroa, Tauranga 3114 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4650649 — Cleanliness

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4650649 — net $4,062.13 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Water rates	$54.19	Water rates
Rubbish removal	$955.00	Rubbish removal
Garage remote	$115.00	Garage remote
Cleaning	$1,380.00	Cleaning
Carpet cleaning	$287.50	Carpet cleaning
Carpet replacement insurance excess	$1,250.00	Carpet replacement insurance excess
Filing fee	$20.44	Filing fee
Net award	$4,062.13
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,062.13

Ms Smith represented the landlord at the hearing. The tenant did not attend.

The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. By an earlier tribunal order the tenancy was terminated and the bond refunded for rent arrears owed by the tenant.

The landlord has taken steps to enforce that earlier order.

How much is owed for water rates?

The tenancy ended on 6 July 2023. The landlord provided a water rates invoice which proves the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.

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) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).

The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.

The tenant did not return the garage remote control provided at the beginning of the tenancy.

The amount claimed for cleaning includes waterblasting a section of the exterior of the house and patio which had chalk marks over it, and the costs of sanding and painting one bedroom wall marked by a drawing with indents. The amount claimed for cleaning was subsequently advised by the contractor to be 24 hours at $60 per hour equating to $1,440.00, and not the $2,200.00 stated on the invoice.

This is an excessive charge for cleaning for a 4 month long tenancy of 3 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms. While the premises were not left reasonably clean and tidy the amount charged is not justified. A landlord has an obligation to mitigate its loss which it has failed to do. See section 49 RTA. I consider it reasonable to award $750.00 for cleaning, $300.00 for the wall repair, and $150 for waterblasting, all plus GST, a total of $ 1,200.00 plus GST.

The landlord claims $500 plus GST for carpet cleaning. The carpets were stained throughout the house as confirmed by the photographs provided. Regardless, the charge is excessive. I award $250 plus GST. This is a prudent step to take to potentially avoid the need to replace the carpet.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The landlord claims the insurance excess of $1,250.00 for replacement carpet. At the hearing Ms Smith sought to amend the claim to include the costs of a second excess of the same amount for carpet. She says the attempt at cleaning the carpet was unsuccessful and was replaced with a similar carpet. The house was a new build at the beginning of the tenancy with new carpet.

The amendment is not allowed primarily because the tenant did not have notice of the amount of this additional claim, which is substantial. It is unfair for the tenant to potentially have an award made against her of which she has no knowledge might eventuate. The landlord also failed to provide documentary evidence of the second excess being incurred, such as written notification from the insurer/broker to the owner.

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.

Based on all the evidence provided I am satisfied the carpets were damaged during the tenancy beyond normal wear and tear. Three young children lived in the house. The extent of the staining was severe and well exceeds normal living wear.

I therefore award the excess of $1,1250.00 as claimed.

Because The landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim I reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4650649 — net $4,062.13 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Water rates	$54.19	Water rates
Rubbish removal	$955.00	Rubbish removal
Garage remote	$115.00	Garage remote
Cleaning	$1,380.00	Cleaning
Carpet cleaning	$287.50	Carpet cleaning
Carpet replacement insurance excess	$1,250.00	Carpet replacement insurance excess
Filing fee	$20.44	Filing fee
Net award	$4,062.13
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,062.13

Order

Santana Toma must pay Boutique Rentals Bop Limited as agent for Landlord $4,062.13 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

Ms Smith represented the landlord at the hearing. The tenant did not attend.
The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. By an earlier tribunal order the tenancy was terminated and the bond refunded for rent arrears owed by the tenant.
The landlord has taken steps to enforce that earlier order.

How much is owed for water rates?

The tenancy ended on 6 July 2023. The landlord provided a water rates invoice which proves the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.

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) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
The tenant did not return the garage remote control provided at the beginning of the tenancy.
The amount claimed for cleaning includes waterblasting a section of the exterior of the house and patio which had chalk marks over it, and the costs of sanding and painting one bedroom wall marked by a drawing with indents. The amount claimed for cleaning was subsequently advised by the contractor to be 24 hours at $60 per hour equating to $1,440.00, and not the $2,200.00 stated on the invoice.
This is an excessive charge for cleaning for a 4 month long tenancy of 3 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms. While the premises were not left reasonably clean and tidy the amount charged is not justified. A landlord has an obligation to mitigate its loss which it has failed to do. See section 49 RTA. I consider it reasonable to award $750.00 for cleaning, $300.00 for the wall repair, and $150 for waterblasting, all plus GST, a total of $ 1,200.00 plus GST.
The landlord claims $500 plus GST for carpet cleaning. The carpets were stained throughout the house as confirmed by the photographs provided. Regardless, the charge is excessive. I award $250 plus GST. This is a prudent step to take to potentially avoid the need to replace the carpet.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The landlord claims the insurance excess of $1,250.00 for replacement carpet. At the hearing Ms Smith sought to amend the claim to include the costs of a second excess of the same amount for carpet. She says the attempt at cleaning the carpet was unsuccessful and was replaced with a similar carpet. The house was a new build at the beginning of the tenancy with new carpet.
The amendment is not allowed primarily because the tenant did not have notice of the amount of this additional claim, which is substantial. It is unfair for the tenant to potentially have an award made against her of which she has no knowledge might eventuate. The landlord also failed to provide documentary evidence of the second excess being incurred, such as written notification from the insurer/broker to the owner.
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.
Based on all the evidence provided I am satisfied the carpets were damaged during the tenancy beyond normal wear and tear. Three young children lived in the house. The extent of the staining was severe and well exceeds normal living wear.
I therefore award the excess of $1,1250.00 as claimed.
Because The landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim I reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4650649 — Cleanliness at 49 Ridge Drive, Omokoroa, Tauranga 3114

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4650649 — Cleanliness at 49 Ridge Drive, Omokoroa, Tauranga 3114

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for water rates?

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 water rates?

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