What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4664832?

The tribunal order states: Alysha Cardno and Luke Haeata must pay Lifestyle Property Management

How much money was awarded in case 4664832?

Cleaning: $350.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 4499496 D…: $1,806.15 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $2,000.00 awarded to landlord; Lightbulbs: $165.99 awarded to landlord; To Sash Windows: $839.50 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: curtains in din…: $118.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Garage Carpet: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: missing curtain…: $46.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Net Curtains: $50.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $361.63 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4664832?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4664832?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9575033-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4664832?

The tribunal order states: Alysha Cardno and Luke Haeata must pay Lifestyle Property Management

How much money was awarded in case 4664832?

Cleaning: $350.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 4499496 D…: $1,806.15 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $2,000.00 awarded to landlord; Lightbulbs: $165.99 awarded to landlord; To Sash Windows: $839.50 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: curtains in din…: $118.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Garage Carpet: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: missing curtain…: $46.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Net Curtains: $50.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $361.63 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4664832?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4664832?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9575033-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

22 Devon Street, Solway, Masterton 5810 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4664832 — Property damage

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4664832 — net $4,357.71 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Previous order application 4499496 dated 06/06/2023	$1,806.15	Previous order application 4499496 dated 06/06/2023
Cleaning	$350.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$361.63	Rubbish removal
Replace furnishings: net curtains	$50.00	Replace furnishings: net curtains
Repairs: shelf,, toilet seat, holes, light bulbs	$165.99	Repairs: shelf,, toilet seat, holes, light bulbs
Replace furnishings: garage carpet	$100.00	Replace furnishings: garage carpet
Replace furnishings: curtains in dining room	$118.00	Replace furnishings: curtains in dining room
Repairs: to sash windows	$839.50	Repairs: to sash windows
Replace furnishings: missing curtains	$46.00	Replace furnishings: missing curtains
Repairs: insurance excess	$2,000.00	Repairs: insurance excess
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$4,357.71
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,357.71

Alysha Cardno and Luke Haeata must pay Lifestyle Property Management Wairarapa Limited $4,357.71 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 6 June 2023 under application 4499496.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,500.00 (6032246-012) to Lifestyle Property Management Wairarapa Limited immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing represented by Ms Gates and Ms Kelynack. There was no appearance for the tenant. As they had been served with the notice of hearing, it went ahead in their absence.

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

On 6 June 2023 the Tribunal made an order terminating this tenancy, for rent arrears to 6 June and reimbursement of the filing fee. The previous order is incorporated into this order for enforcement purposes.

Before considering these claims, I note that an applicant, the landlord here, has the burden of proof placed on them to prove their claim to the required standard. This means they cannot just allege something; they must adduce evidence to persuade me that their version of events is the correct one. The standard is the civil standard of the “balance of probabilities” or what is “more likely than not”.

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 landlord has established in evidence that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The house had not been cleaned at all and there was a significant mess left. The amounts claimed are proven and accordingly ordered as sought.

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.

I discuss each of the damage amounts claimed separately as follows. Curtains & net curtains

The landlord has established in evidence that the net curtains and curtains in the dining room had been slashed and there were other curtains missing. I am satisfied that this was intentional damage therefore the tenants are responsible for the replacement costs.

However, in determining the compensation payable, depreciation must be taken into account. Depreciation is linked to the concept of betterment. Everything is subject to wear and tear and will need to be replaced in time. Where an item has to be replaced as a result of tenant damage, this hastens the process. If the damaged item is replaced with a ‘better’ item, compensation is adjusted to reflect that.

Net curtains have an expected lifespan of 1-3 years, and curtains 8 years. These were all new in 2020, therefore were three years old. Accordingly, I have reduced the amounts claimed slightly to account for depreciation. General repairs

The landlord has established that the toilet seat had to be replaced, and various holes had to be repaired in walls and windowsills. I consider the tenants liable for these repairs as the pictures indicate they were caused carelessly and/or intentionally. The amount claimed is just for the materials as the landlord has not invoiced for their time which I consider reasonable, and therefore I approve the claim as sought. Garage carpet

The landlord has established that the tenants removed the garage carpet and left it in the garden to deteriorate. I consider this intentional damage and accordingly the tenants are responsible for the replacement cost which I have slightly reduced to account for depreciation. Sash windows

The landlord has proven that two sash windows had been broken. Having considered the evidence provided, I am satisfied that this is careless damage as they should not have broken had reasonable care been taken with them when using them. Accordingly, I approve the claim as sought which is less than the s49B cap discussed above. Smashed door & hole

The landlord seeks reimbursement of the $1,500 insurance excess for having to repair the smashed in front door, a major hole in the wall and carpet stains. The damage is extensive, and I am satisfied intentionally caused given its nature. Accordingly, I find the tenants liable for this claim. Missed rent

The landlord seeks $500 being the insurance excess for their approved insurance claim of 8 weeks rent being the time it took to repair the property and get it ready for re-renting. In fact, it has only recently been re-rented therefore this is modest. I am satisfied that it was reasonably foreseeable for the tenants that leaving the property in the state they did would take a considerable amount of time to rectify. As the claim is effectively only one week’s rent for them, I consider this reasonable and order the claim as sought. Filing fee

Because Lifestyle Property Management Wairarapa Limited has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4664832 — net $4,357.71 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Previous order application 4499496 dated 06/06/2023	$1,806.15	Previous order application 4499496 dated 06/06/2023
Cleaning	$350.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$361.63	Rubbish removal
Replace furnishings: net curtains	$50.00	Replace furnishings: net curtains
Repairs: shelf,, toilet seat, holes, light bulbs	$165.99	Repairs: shelf,, toilet seat, holes, light bulbs
Replace furnishings: garage carpet	$100.00	Replace furnishings: garage carpet
Replace furnishings: curtains in dining room	$118.00	Replace furnishings: curtains in dining room
Repairs: to sash windows	$839.50	Repairs: to sash windows
Replace furnishings: missing curtains	$46.00	Replace furnishings: missing curtains
Repairs: insurance excess	$2,000.00	Repairs: insurance excess
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$4,357.71
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,357.71

Order

Alysha Cardno and Luke Haeata must pay Lifestyle Property Management Wairarapa Limited $4,357.71 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 6 June 2023 under application 4499496.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,500.00 (6032246-012) to Lifestyle Property Management Wairarapa Limited immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing represented by Ms Gates and Ms Kelynack. There was no appearance for the tenant. As they had been served with the notice of hearing, it went ahead in their absence.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
On 6 June 2023 the Tribunal made an order terminating this tenancy, for rent arrears to 6 June and reimbursement of the filing fee. The previous order is incorporated into this order for enforcement purposes.
Before considering these claims, I note that an applicant, the landlord here, has the burden of proof placed on them to prove their claim to the required standard. This means they cannot just allege something; they must adduce evidence to persuade me that their version of events is the correct one. The standard is the civil standard of the “balance of probabilities” or what is “more likely than not”.

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 landlord has established in evidence that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The house had not been cleaned at all and there was a significant mess left. The amounts claimed are proven and accordingly ordered as sought.

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.
I discuss each of the damage amounts claimed separately as follows. Curtains & net curtains
The landlord has established in evidence that the net curtains and curtains in the dining room had been slashed and there were other curtains missing. I am satisfied that this was intentional damage therefore the tenants are responsible for the replacement costs.
However, in determining the compensation payable, depreciation must be taken into account. Depreciation is linked to the concept of betterment. Everything is subject to wear and tear and will need to be replaced in time. Where an item has to be replaced as a result of tenant damage, this hastens the process. If the damaged item is replaced with a ‘better’ item, compensation is adjusted to reflect that.
Net curtains have an expected lifespan of 1-3 years, and curtains 8 years. These were all new in 2020, therefore were three years old. Accordingly, I have reduced the amounts claimed slightly to account for depreciation. General repairs
The landlord has established that the toilet seat had to be replaced, and various holes had to be repaired in walls and windowsills. I consider the tenants liable for these repairs as the pictures indicate they were caused carelessly and/or intentionally. The amount claimed is just for the materials as the landlord has not invoiced for their time which I consider reasonable, and therefore I approve the claim as sought. Garage carpet
The landlord has established that the tenants removed the garage carpet and left it in the garden to deteriorate. I consider this intentional damage and accordingly the tenants are responsible for the replacement cost which I have slightly reduced to account for depreciation. Sash windows
The landlord has proven that two sash windows had been broken. Having considered the evidence provided, I am satisfied that this is careless damage as they should not have broken had reasonable care been taken with them when using them. Accordingly, I approve the claim as sought which is less than the s49B cap discussed above. Smashed door & hole
The landlord seeks reimbursement of the $1,500 insurance excess for having to repair the smashed in front door, a major hole in the wall and carpet stains. The damage is extensive, and I am satisfied intentionally caused given its nature. Accordingly, I find the tenants liable for this claim. Missed rent
The landlord seeks $500 being the insurance excess for their approved insurance claim of 8 weeks rent being the time it took to repair the property and get it ready for re-renting. In fact, it has only recently been re-rented therefore this is modest. I am satisfied that it was reasonably foreseeable for the tenants that leaving the property in the state they did would take a considerable amount of time to rectify. As the claim is effectively only one week’s rent for them, I consider this reasonable and order the claim as sought. Filing fee
Because Lifestyle Property Management Wairarapa Limited has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4664832 — Property damage at 22 Devon Street, Solway, Masterton 5810

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4664832 — Property damage at 22 Devon Street, Solway, Masterton 5810

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