What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4666372?

The tribunal order states: Nesta Maehe must pay Regent Realty Limited - As Agent For Ju Qiang Chen &

How much money was awarded in case 4666372?

Bailiff Enforcement Cost: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $210.00 awarded to landlord; Painting To Restore Paintwork: $5,400.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $242.50 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $959.98 awarded to landlord; To Walls: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Drapes: $1,008.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $1,702.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4666372?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4666372?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9622794-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4666372?

The tribunal order states: Nesta Maehe must pay Regent Realty Limited - As Agent For Ju Qiang Chen &

How much money was awarded in case 4666372?

Bailiff Enforcement Cost: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $210.00 awarded to landlord; Painting To Restore Paintwork: $5,400.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $242.50 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $959.98 awarded to landlord; To Walls: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Drapes: $1,008.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $1,702.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4666372?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4666372?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9622794-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

32 Longfellow Avenue, Maraenui, Napier 4110 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4666372 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

32 Longfellow Avenue, Maraenui, Napier 4110 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4666372 — Rent arrears | TenantCheck

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4666372 — net $9,922.48 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears 10/7/2023 to 24/7/2023	$959.98	Rent arrears 10/7/2023 to 24/7/2023
Bailiff enforcement cost	$200.00	Bailiff enforcement cost
Painting to restore paintwork	$5,400.00	Painting to restore paintwork
Lock/key replacement	$242.50	Lock/key replacement
Repairs: to walls	$200.00	Repairs: to walls
Rubbish removal: and cleaning and lawns and gardens	$1,702.00	Rubbish removal: and cleaning and lawns and gardens
Carpet Cleaning	$210.00	Carpet Cleaning
Replace drapes	$1,008.00	Replace drapes
Net award	$9,922.48
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$9,922.48

Claims and awards for application 4666372 — net $9,922.48 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears 10/7/2023 to 24/7/2023

Amount: $959.98
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears 10/7/2023 to 24/7/2023

Bailiff enforcement cost

Amount: $200.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Bailiff enforcement cost

Painting to restore paintwork

Amount: $5,400.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Painting to restore paintwork

Lock/key replacement

Amount: $242.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lock/key replacement

Repairs: to walls

Amount: $200.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: to walls

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Carpet Cleaning Property damage Rent arrears Lawns And Garden Work

Order

Nesta Maehe must pay Regent Realty Limited - As Agent For Ju Qiang Chen & Lihua Zhang $9,922.48 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

Only the applicant landlord attended both hearings, the first convened on 4 October and the second on 10 November 2023.
The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owing for rent?

The tenancy ended with a Tribunal order granting possession to the landlord on 10 July 2023. The tenant did not vacate as required by that order, and a bailiff attended on 24/7/2023 to enforce the possession order.
The rent owing is calculated from 10 until 23 July 2023 and confirmed by the rent summary provided.
The enforcement cost for the bailiff to attend is proven by the receipt provided and awarded.

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 and littered with rubbish.
The tenant did not return the keys.
The following chattels were missing at the end of the tenancy: all of the drapes and curtains were removed. 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, I have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.
The total amount claimed has been depreciated by 20% as the curtains were three years old at the end of the tenancy. They were however in immaculate condition and should not have been removed.
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.
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: three large holes were made in the walls. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The amount claimed at the first hearing was for repairing the holes only and is awarded.
At the reconvened hearing the landlord also claimed for the cost of repainting the walls to repair the damage. The walls, doors and window frames were extensively graffitied and damaged with a sharp object.
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, I have taken into account the age and condition of the paintwork at the start of the tenancy and its likely useful lifespan.
The total amount claimed has been depreciated by 20% as the property had been repainted immediately before the tenancy. The paintwork was therefore three years old at the end of the tenancy. The painter has confirmed that only damaged and tagged areas were painted.
The amounts ordered are proved.
The tenant is to pay the filing fee and the public interest requires publication of the order without suppression.

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4666372 — net $9,922.48 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears 10/7/2023 to 24/7/2023	$959.98	Rent arrears 10/7/2023 to 24/7/2023
Bailiff enforcement cost	$200.00	Bailiff enforcement cost
Painting to restore paintwork	$5,400.00	Painting to restore paintwork
Lock/key replacement	$242.50	Lock/key replacement
Repairs: to walls	$200.00	Repairs: to walls
Rubbish removal: and cleaning and lawns and gardens	$1,702.00	Rubbish removal: and cleaning and lawns and gardens
Carpet Cleaning	$210.00	Carpet Cleaning
Replace drapes	$1,008.00	Replace drapes
Net award	$9,922.48
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$9,922.48

Claims and awards for application 4666372 — net $9,922.48 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears 10/7/2023 to 24/7/2023

Amount: $959.98
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears 10/7/2023 to 24/7/2023

Bailiff enforcement cost

Amount: $200.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Bailiff enforcement cost

Painting to restore paintwork

Amount: $5,400.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Painting to restore paintwork

Lock/key replacement

Amount: $242.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lock/key replacement

Repairs: to walls

Amount: $200.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: to walls

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Carpet Cleaning Property damage Rent arrears Lawns And Garden Work

Order

Nesta Maehe must pay Regent Realty Limited - As Agent For Ju Qiang Chen & Lihua Zhang $9,922.48 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

Only the applicant landlord attended both hearings, the first convened on 4 October and the second on 10 November 2023.
The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owing for rent?

The tenancy ended with a Tribunal order granting possession to the landlord on 10 July 2023. The tenant did not vacate as required by that order, and a bailiff attended on 24/7/2023 to enforce the possession order.
The rent owing is calculated from 10 until 23 July 2023 and confirmed by the rent summary provided.
The enforcement cost for the bailiff to attend is proven by the receipt provided and awarded.

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 and littered with rubbish.
The tenant did not return the keys.
The following chattels were missing at the end of the tenancy: all of the drapes and curtains were removed. 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, I have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.
The total amount claimed has been depreciated by 20% as the curtains were three years old at the end of the tenancy. They were however in immaculate condition and should not have been removed.
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.
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: three large holes were made in the walls. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The amount claimed at the first hearing was for repairing the holes only and is awarded.
At the reconvened hearing the landlord also claimed for the cost of repainting the walls to repair the damage. The walls, doors and window frames were extensively graffitied and damaged with a sharp object.
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, I have taken into account the age and condition of the paintwork at the start of the tenancy and its likely useful lifespan.
The total amount claimed has been depreciated by 20% as the property had been repainted immediately before the tenancy. The paintwork was therefore three years old at the end of the tenancy. The painter has confirmed that only damaged and tagged areas were painted.
The amounts ordered are proved.
The tenant is to pay the filing fee and the public interest requires publication of the order without suppression.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4666372 — Rent arrears at 32 Longfellow Avenue, Maraenui, Napier 4110

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4666372 — Rent arrears at 32 Longfellow Avenue, Maraenui, Napier 4110

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owing 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 owing 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