What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4663729?

The tribunal order states: William Mataio and Te Pora Bennett must pay Monarch Realty Limited T/A

How much money was awarded in case 4663729?

Cleaning: $170.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $620.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $412.76 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 4612353 D…: $190.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $310.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $900.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,605.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $77.60 awarded to landlord; To Benchtop: $414.00 awarded to landlord; Walls and Doors: $484.16 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4663729?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4663729?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9596428-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4663729?

The tribunal order states: William Mataio and Te Pora Bennett must pay Monarch Realty Limited T/A

How much money was awarded in case 4663729?

Cleaning: $170.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $620.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $412.76 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 4612353 D…: $190.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $310.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $900.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,605.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $77.60 awarded to landlord; To Benchtop: $414.00 awarded to landlord; Walls and Doors: $484.16 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4663729?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4663729?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9596428-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

43 Morris Road, Hillcrest, Hamilton 3216 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4663729 — Property damage

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4663729 — net $5,204.40 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Previous order application 4612353 dated 06/07/2023	$190.44	Previous order application 4612353 dated 06/07/2023
Cleaning: including replacing curtain hooks	$620.00	Cleaning: including replacing curtain hooks
Lawns and Garden work and rubbish removal	$412.76	Lawns and Garden work and rubbish removal
Lock/key replacement	$310.00	Lock/key replacement
Carpet Cleaning	$170.00	Carpet Cleaning
Carpet replacement during tenancy lounge and bedroom	$900.00	Carpet replacement during tenancy lounge and bedroom
Carpet replacement 2 bedrooms end of tenancy	$1,605.00	Carpet replacement 2 bedrooms end of tenancy
Repairs: to benchtop	$414.00	Repairs: to benchtop
Electrical fittings replacement/repair	$77.60	Electrical fittings replacement/repair
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Repairs: Walls and doors	$484.16	Repairs: Walls and doors
Net award	$5,204.40
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,204.40

Only the applicant landlord attended the hearing.

The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following 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. 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, and did not remove all rubbish. The lawns and gardens were overgrown in part and part of the lawn needed resowing because the tenants had parked their cars on the lawn, despite being asked not to.

The tenant did not return the keys.

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 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: carpet in two bedrooms as replaced during the tenancy because of extensive staining that could not be removed. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The insurance excess of $900 is awarded as this is less than the cost of replacing the carpet even allowing for depreciation.

The cost of replacing the carpet in the master and one further bedroom is awarded as the evidence establishes that the carpets were extensively stained and damaged (probably by a dog in one area). Two power plugs were damaged and towel rails removed from the walls of the bathroom and laundry. Other walls were scribbled on and the ceiling scuffed (probably by children on a top bunk). The kitchen bench was damaged, probably by either hot objects or a knife. It cost less to repair than replace so the repair cost is awarded.

The amounts ordered are proved.

I have taken into account 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 for the cost of replacing carpet in the two bedrooms at the end of the tenancy, I have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.

This order incorporates the previous Tribunal order made on 6 July 2023 under Application number 4612353.

The order is to be published without supression.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4663729 — net $5,204.40 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Previous order application 4612353 dated 06/07/2023	$190.44	Previous order application 4612353 dated 06/07/2023
Cleaning: including replacing curtain hooks	$620.00	Cleaning: including replacing curtain hooks
Lawns and Garden work and rubbish removal	$412.76	Lawns and Garden work and rubbish removal
Lock/key replacement	$310.00	Lock/key replacement
Carpet Cleaning	$170.00	Carpet Cleaning
Carpet replacement during tenancy lounge and bedroom	$900.00	Carpet replacement during tenancy lounge and bedroom
Carpet replacement 2 bedrooms end of tenancy	$1,605.00	Carpet replacement 2 bedrooms end of tenancy
Repairs: to benchtop	$414.00	Repairs: to benchtop
Electrical fittings replacement/repair	$77.60	Electrical fittings replacement/repair
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Repairs: Walls and doors	$484.16	Repairs: Walls and doors
Net award	$5,204.40
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,204.40

Order

William Mataio and Te Pora Bennett must pay Monarch Realty Limited T/A Harcourts Hamilton Rentals As Agent For C & D Appleby $5,204.40 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
This order replaces and incorporates Tribunal Order 4612353 issued on 6 July 2023.

Reasons

Only the applicant landlord attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following 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. 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, and did not remove all rubbish. The lawns and gardens were overgrown in part and part of the lawn needed resowing because the tenants had parked their cars on the lawn, despite being asked not to.
The tenant did not return the keys.
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 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: carpet in two bedrooms as replaced during the tenancy because of extensive staining that could not be removed. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The insurance excess of $900 is awarded as this is less than the cost of replacing the carpet even allowing for depreciation.
The cost of replacing the carpet in the master and one further bedroom is awarded as the evidence establishes that the carpets were extensively stained and damaged (probably by a dog in one area). Two power plugs were damaged and towel rails removed from the walls of the bathroom and laundry. Other walls were scribbled on and the ceiling scuffed (probably by children on a top bunk). The kitchen bench was damaged, probably by either hot objects or a knife. It cost less to repair than replace so the repair cost is awarded.
The amounts ordered are proved.
I have taken into account 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 for the cost of replacing carpet in the two bedrooms at the end of the tenancy, I have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.
This order incorporates the previous Tribunal order made on 6 July 2023 under Application number 4612353.
The order is to be published without supression.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4663729 — Property damage at 43 Morris Road, Hillcrest, Hamilton 3216

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4663729 — Property damage at 43 Morris Road, Hillcrest, Hamilton 3216

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

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