What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4674089?

The tribunal order states: Siosifa Pailate must pay Barfoot & Thompson Limited $1,970.29 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 4674089?

Door Painting: $115.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $563.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $203.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,068.35 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4674089?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4674089?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9761590-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4674089?

The tribunal order states: Siosifa Pailate must pay Barfoot & Thompson Limited $1,970.29 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 4674089?

Door Painting: $115.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $563.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $203.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,068.35 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4674089?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4674089?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9761590-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 5, 291 Mount Wellington Highway, Mount Tenancy Tribunal Case 4674089 — Property damage

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4674089 — net $1,970.29 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning, carpet cleaning, rubbish removal	$1,068.35	Cleaning, carpet cleaning, rubbish removal
Repairs to doorframe	$563.50	Repairs to doorframe
Door painting	$115.00	Door painting
Lock/key replacement	$203.00	Lock/key replacement
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,970.29
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,970.29

The landlord attended the hearing yesterday by telephone (with permission).

On 1 September 2023 the landlord applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy on 29 June 2023.

Under the rules that apply when an application is filed more than 2 months after the end of the tenancy, the application must be served either personally on the tenant, on someone over the age of 16 living at address where the tenant now lives, or by post to an address provided by the tenant within two months before the application was made.

The application has not been served in accordance with those requirements. The landlord understands that the tenant is incarcerated. The application has been emailed to the tenant (on 5 October 2023) and to his solicitor (on 13 December 2023).

In the circumstances, I am satisfied that all reasonable efforts have been made to locate the tenant, and that the application has been served by means likely to bring or to have brought the proceedings to the tenant’s notice. I direct that the application be treated as having been served by email.

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.

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

Belongings were left behind in the kitchen and lounge, including cooking utensils and large items of furniture. The carpets and floors needing cleaning. The interior of the property looks old but there are clearly marks and stains at the end of the tenancy in the photographs that were not there in the beginning. The oven was very clean when the tenancy commenced but needed cleaning after the tenancy, as did areas in the bathroom. I find that the cleaning ($516.35) and rubbish removal costs ($552.00) are reasonable.

The locks had to be changed at the end of the tenancy to make the property secure, as the keys were not returned ($203.00).

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.

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 4 weeks' rent. The insurance excess was $400.00.

Where the damage is careless and is not covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to 4 weeks' rent.

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.

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.

The backdoor frame was damaged during the tenancy and had to be repaired $563.50), repainted ($115.00) and the lock replaced (included in the repair cost for the doorframe). The nature of the damage, which appears to include the door being nailed shut with pieces of wood, suggests it was intentional. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. Filing fee

The landlord’s application has been successful. I award the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4674089 — net $1,970.29 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning, carpet cleaning, rubbish removal	$1,068.35	Cleaning, carpet cleaning, rubbish removal
Repairs to doorframe	$563.50	Repairs to doorframe
Door painting	$115.00	Door painting
Lock/key replacement	$203.00	Lock/key replacement
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,970.29
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,970.29

Order

Siosifa Pailate must pay Barfoot & Thompson Limited $1,970.29 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing yesterday by telephone (with permission).
On 1 September 2023 the landlord applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy on 29 June 2023.
Under the rules that apply when an application is filed more than 2 months after the end of the tenancy, the application must be served either personally on the tenant, on someone over the age of 16 living at address where the tenant now lives, or by post to an address provided by the tenant within two months before the application was made.
The application has not been served in accordance with those requirements. The landlord understands that the tenant is incarcerated. The application has been emailed to the tenant (on 5 October 2023) and to his solicitor (on 13 December 2023).
In the circumstances, I am satisfied that all reasonable efforts have been made to locate the tenant, and that the application has been served by means likely to bring or to have brought the proceedings to the tenant’s notice. I direct that the application be treated as having been served by email.

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.
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
Belongings were left behind in the kitchen and lounge, including cooking utensils and large items of furniture. The carpets and floors needing cleaning. The interior of the property looks old but there are clearly marks and stains at the end of the tenancy in the photographs that were not there in the beginning. The oven was very clean when the tenancy commenced but needed cleaning after the tenancy, as did areas in the bathroom. I find that the cleaning ($516.35) and rubbish removal costs ($552.00) are reasonable.
The locks had to be changed at the end of the tenancy to make the property secure, as the keys were not returned ($203.00).

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.
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 4 weeks' rent. The insurance excess was $400.00.
Where the damage is careless and is not covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to 4 weeks' rent.
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.
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.
The backdoor frame was damaged during the tenancy and had to be repaired $563.50), repainted ($115.00) and the lock replaced (included in the repair cost for the doorframe). The nature of the damage, which appears to include the door being nailed shut with pieces of wood, suggests it was intentional. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. Filing fee
The landlord’s application has been successful. I award the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4674089 — Property damage at Unit/Flat 5, 291 Mount Wellington Highway, Mount

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4674089 — Property damage at Unit/Flat 5, 291 Mount Wellington Highway, Mount

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

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

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions