What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4662589?

The tribunal order states: The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,240.00 (5856161-002) to Nid Renters

How much money was awarded in case 4662589?

Breach Of The Building Management Ru…: $368.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $382.24 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $270.25 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $11,385.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $407.50 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $774.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,610.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,840.00 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: (Carpet Install…: $2,216.05 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4662589?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4662589?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9867830-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4662589?

The tribunal order states: The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,240.00 (5856161-002) to Nid Renters

How much money was awarded in case 4662589?

Breach Of The Building Management Ru…: $368.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $382.24 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $270.25 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $11,385.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $407.50 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $774.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,610.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,840.00 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: (Carpet Install…: $2,216.05 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4662589?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4662589?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9867830-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 302C, 130 Anzac Street, Takapuna, Auckland Tenancy Tribunal Case 4662589 — Cleanliness

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4662589 — net $18,033.48 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears 9to 6/8/2023	$1,840.00	Rent arrears 9to 6/8/2023
Replace furnishings: (Carpet Installation	$2,216.05	Replace furnishings: (Carpet Installation
Meth testing/Cleaning: (Test 1- pre decontamination	$407.50	Meth testing/Cleaning: (Test 1- pre decontamination
Breach of the Building Management Rules	$368.00	Breach of the Building Management Rules
Meth testing/Cleaning: (Test 2- pre decontamination	$774.00	Meth testing/Cleaning: (Test 2- pre decontamination
Meth testing/Cleaning: (Decontamination	$11,385.00	Meth testing/Cleaning: (Decontamination
Meth testing/Cleaning: (Test 3- post decontamination	$1,000.00	Meth testing/Cleaning: (Test 3- post decontamination
Lock/key replacement: (Key Lock Change	$382.24	Lock/key replacement: (Key Lock Change
Lock/key replacement: (New key and remote	$270.25	Lock/key replacement: (New key and remote
Electrical fittings replacement/repair	$1,610.00	Electrical fittings replacement/repair
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$18,033.48
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$18,033.48

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4662589 — net $18,033.48 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.

Claim

Landlord

Tenant

Reason

Rent arrears 9to 6/8/2023

$1,840.00

Rent arrears 9to 6/8/2023

Replace furnishings: (Carpet Installation

$2,216.05

Replace furnishings: (Carpet Installation

Meth testing/Cleaning: (Test 1- pre decontamination

$407.50

Meth testing/Cleaning: (Test 1- pre decontamination

Breach of the Building Management Rules

$368.00

Breach of the Building Management Rules

Meth testing/Cleaning: (Test 2- pre decontamination

$774.00

Meth testing/Cleaning: (Test 2- pre decontamination

Meth testing/Cleaning: (Decontamination

$11,385.00

Meth testing/Cleaning: (Decontamination

Meth testing/Cleaning: (Test 3- post decontamination

$1,000.00

Meth testing/Cleaning: (Test 3- post decontamination

Lock/key replacement: (Key Lock Change

$382.24

Lock/key replacement: (Key Lock Change

Lock/key replacement: (New key and remote

$270.25

Lock/key replacement: (New key and remote

Electrical fittings replacement/repair

$1,610.00

Electrical fittings replacement/repair

Filing fee reimbursement

$20.44

Filing fee reimbursement

Net award

$18,033.48

Total payable by Tenant to Landlord

$18,033.48

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not.

I am satisfied that the tenant had received proper notice of the hearing time, date and place and chose not to attend.

The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended 6 August 2023. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy. The tenant failed to pay rent from 15 July 2023 t 6 August 2023 after a series of Police raids resulted in the tenant’s arrest for the manufacture, supply and use of methamphetamine from the premises.

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. 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 tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy. The premises were left contaminated by methamphetamine and requiring a full commercial clean on top of decontamination.

The tenant did not remove all rubbish. He disposed of his methamphetamine contaminated property in the building rubbish area in breach of the Building Management’s Operational Rules.

The tenant did not return the keys which resulted in the landlord having to get new locks installed, keys cut and a new remote control.

The amounts ordered are 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 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: a. All the switch and power sockets had to be replaced; b. All the LED lights had to be replaced; c. The fan cover and heater had to be replaced; and d. The carpet was so contaminated by high levels of methamphetamine that it all had to be replaced. e. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The amounts ordered are proved.

I have considered 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 considered the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Methamphetamine contamination

The landlord has applied for compensation for the cost of methamphetamine testing and remediation as well as the reimbursement of the penalty it had to pay to the Building Management for the tenant’s breach of the Body Corporates Operational Rules, namely using the premises for unlawful purposes.

The landlord must prove that the tenant caused or permitted the contamination, or that it was caused by someone at the premises with the tenant’s consent. The landlord must also prove that, as a result of the contamination, the premises have been damaged or are not reasonably clean.

Section 138C Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides for regulations to be made prescribing the maximum acceptable level for contaminants, but as yet no regulations have been made in relation to methamphetamine.

There are currently two sources of guidance on the issue of a safe level of methamphetamine contamination in residential premises. In June 2017 Standards New Zealand published NZS 8510:2017. The standard recommended a maximum contamination level of 1.5μg/100cm2 for high use areas where contamination has resulted from both consumption and manufacture. It recommended a higher level of 3.8μg/100cm2 for limited use areas.

In May 2018 Professor Sir Peter Gluckman, the then Prime Minister's Chief Science Advisor, released a report "Methamphetamine contamination in residential properties: Exposures, risk levels, and interpretation of standards”. The report noted that there is a lack of scientific evidence to prove that low-level third-hand methamphetamine exposure poses a health risk to humans. It stated that guidelines should be proportionate to risk and that exposure to a level below 15μg/100cm2 was unlikely to have an adverse effect. It recommended retaining the level of 1.5μg/100cm2 where contamination resulted from manufacture, due to the risk posed by harmful chemicals used in the process.

The District Court has held that remediation should be carried out in accordance with the prevailing guidelines at the time (Diamond Real Estate Limited v Allan [2017] NZDC 833, Judge Kellar).

The Tribunal has generally applied the Gluckman recommendation. This approach was approved by the District Court in Full Circle Real Estate Limited v Piper [2019] NZDC 4947, where the Court stated (at para [36]): “The Tenancy Tribunal was in a difficult position. The best state of knowledge of risk to human health from methamphetamine contamination available to the adjudicator was the Gluckman Report. It would have been bold for the adjudicator to have ignored that report in favour of the New Zealand Standard given that the Gluckman report represents the current scientific knowledge on the risk to human health from methamphetamine contamination in dwellings.”

The District Court took a similar approach in Acme Realty Limited v Hogg and others [2021] NZDC 3231, where the Court referred to the Full Circle case and held that, because NZS 8510:2017 has not been adopted into law, the Tribunal was not bound to apply the 1.5μg standard.

More recently, in Barfoot and Thompson Limited v Kāhui Tū Kaha Limited [2021] NZTT Auckland 4276319, both parties presented scientific evidence at a hearing before the Tribunal. The Tribunal concluded that there was no new scientific research to change the conclusions reached in the Gluckman Report.

The landlord’s evidence disclosed that the building manager has witnessed the New Zealand Police coming to the premises on a number of occasions and had witnessed the tenant had been arrested and charged with the manufacture, distribution and use of methamphetamine from the premises. The New Zealand Police provided a report/notification to the landlord confirming the same.

The New Zealand Police’s National Clandestine Drug Response Team wrote to Auckland Council notifying it that the landlord’s property is contaminated with methamphetamine and is not able to be resided in until the property has been fully tested and decontaminated by an approved remediation provider.

The landlord provided a detailed testing report that disclosed methamphetamine contamination at the following levels: a. Kitchen: 548μg/100cm2; b. Bedroom 1:112μg/100cm2; c. Bathroom:242μg/100cm2; d. Bedroom 2: 25.2μg/100cm2; and e. Hallway: 26.6μg/100cm2;

The landlord’s evidence proved contamination in the premises were at a level greater than the 15μg/100cm2 level in the Gluckman report and well above the NZS 8510:2017 standard recommended maximum contamination levels of

5μg/100cm2 for high use areas (where contamination has resulted from both consumption and manufacture) and 3.8μg/100cm2 for limited use areas.

It follows that the landlord’s claim for the costs of decontamination cleaning must be granted. Methamphetamine testing costs

The landlord has also claimed for the cost of methamphetamine testing. It is an offence under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 for any person to have in their possession or consume any controlled drug and to allow any premises to be used for the commission of an offence under that Act and (sections 7 and 12). “Methamphetamine” is included as a controlled drug under Schedule 1 of the Misuse of Drugs Act.

It follows that the manufacture and consumption of methamphetamine on premises amounts to the use of those premises for an unlawful purpose, in breach of section 40(2)(b) RTA. The tenant was therefore in breach of his obligations under the RTA.

Auckland Council wrote to the landlord on 3 July 2023 informing it: a. The Council has been notified by the NZ Police Department’s National Clandestine Drug Response Team, that the landlord’s property is contaminated with methamphetamine; b. The contamination may be at a level that presents a danger to the health and wellbeing of any occupants and represents a potential health risk; c. The Council has a statutory duty to ensure that these risks are assessed and if present, eliminated; and d. No one is permitted to reside in the premises until it had been decontaminated properly by an approved remediation company.

It is appropriate in these circumstances to award the landlord the costs incurred in having the property tested for contamination at the end of the tenancy, as it was prudent for the landlord to have the tests done, given the positive proof that methamphetamine was manufactured and consumed in the property in breach of the tenant’s obligations.

It is also appropriate to award to landlord the costs of re-testing after the premises had been decontaminated to prove to the Council that the premises were fit for purpose again and no longer represented a health risk to any occupier. Reimbursement of the filing fee

Because Nid Renters Limited has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4662589 — net $18,033.48 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears 9to 6/8/2023	$1,840.00	Rent arrears 9to 6/8/2023
Replace furnishings: (Carpet Installation	$2,216.05	Replace furnishings: (Carpet Installation
Meth testing/Cleaning: (Test 1- pre decontamination	$407.50	Meth testing/Cleaning: (Test 1- pre decontamination
Breach of the Building Management Rules	$368.00	Breach of the Building Management Rules
Meth testing/Cleaning: (Test 2- pre decontamination	$774.00	Meth testing/Cleaning: (Test 2- pre decontamination
Meth testing/Cleaning: (Decontamination	$11,385.00	Meth testing/Cleaning: (Decontamination
Meth testing/Cleaning: (Test 3- post decontamination	$1,000.00	Meth testing/Cleaning: (Test 3- post decontamination
Lock/key replacement: (Key Lock Change	$382.24	Lock/key replacement: (Key Lock Change
Lock/key replacement: (New key and remote	$270.25	Lock/key replacement: (New key and remote
Electrical fittings replacement/repair	$1,610.00	Electrical fittings replacement/repair
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$18,033.48
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$18,033.48

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4662589 — net $18,033.48 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.

Claim

Landlord

Tenant

Reason

Rent arrears 9to 6/8/2023

$1,840.00

Rent arrears 9to 6/8/2023

Replace furnishings: (Carpet Installation

$2,216.05

Replace furnishings: (Carpet Installation

Meth testing/Cleaning: (Test 1- pre decontamination

$407.50

Meth testing/Cleaning: (Test 1- pre decontamination

Breach of the Building Management Rules

$368.00

Breach of the Building Management Rules

Meth testing/Cleaning: (Test 2- pre decontamination

$774.00

Meth testing/Cleaning: (Test 2- pre decontamination

Meth testing/Cleaning: (Decontamination

$11,385.00

Meth testing/Cleaning: (Decontamination

Meth testing/Cleaning: (Test 3- post decontamination

$1,000.00

Meth testing/Cleaning: (Test 3- post decontamination

Lock/key replacement: (Key Lock Change

$382.24

Lock/key replacement: (Key Lock Change

Lock/key replacement: (New key and remote

$270.25

Lock/key replacement: (New key and remote

Electrical fittings replacement/repair

$1,610.00

Electrical fittings replacement/repair

Filing fee reimbursement

$20.44

Filing fee reimbursement

Net award

$18,033.48

Total payable by Tenant to Landlord

$18,033.48

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not.

I am satisfied that the tenant had received proper notice of the hearing time, date and place and chose not to attend.

The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy. The premises were left contaminated by methamphetamine and requiring a full commercial clean on top of decontamination.

The tenant did not remove all rubbish. He disposed of his methamphetamine contaminated property in the building rubbish area in breach of the Building Management’s Operational Rules.

The tenant did not return the keys which resulted in the landlord having to get new locks installed, keys cut and a new remote control.

The amounts ordered are proved.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The amounts ordered are proved.

The District Court has held that remediation should be carried out in accordance with the prevailing guidelines at the time (Diamond Real Estate Limited v Allan [2017] NZDC 833, Judge Kellar).

5μg/100cm2 for high use areas (where contamination has resulted from both consumption and manufacture) and 3.8μg/100cm2 for limited use areas.

It follows that the landlord’s claim for the costs of decontamination cleaning must be granted. Methamphetamine testing costs

Because Nid Renters Limited has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4662589 — Cleanliness at Unit/Flat 302C, 130 Anzac Street, Takapuna, Auckland

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4662589 — Cleanliness at Unit/Flat 302C, 130 Anzac Street, Takapuna, Auckland

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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 rent?

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