What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4675831?

The tribunal order states: Faheem Awvince and Mahja Agustines to pay Mehome Limited As Agent For

How much money was awarded in case 4675831?

Sliding Wardrobe: $908.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4675831?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4675831?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10617246-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4675831?

The tribunal order states: Faheem Awvince and Mahja Agustines to pay Mehome Limited As Agent For

How much money was awarded in case 4675831?

Sliding Wardrobe: $908.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4675831?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4675831?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10617246-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 613, 223A Green Lane West, Epsom, Auckland Tenancy Tribunal Case 4675831 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4675831. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Repairs: sliding wardrobe	$908.50		Repairs: sliding wardrobe

The landlord attended via teleconference. The tenant did not.

This was a rehearing on the issue of wardrobe doors only from 11 th January 2024.

The landlord claimed that the wardrobe doors were damaged by the tenants carelessly and was not fair wear and tear.

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 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“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. 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. 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 have read the tenant’s explanation about the wardrobe doors becoming loose and being damaged as a result. Having seen the photos, evidence from the wardrobe manufacturer and video of the wardrobe door’s durability, I find it more likely than not that the wardrobe doors became damaged because the doors were closed when there was something protruding out of the wardrobe. I find that the damage was carelessly caused by the tenant.

The insurance excess was $2,500.00. The actual quotation for repair is much less. Therefore, I order the tenant to pay the landlord $908.50 for the damage caused to the wardrobe doors.

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4675831. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Repairs: sliding wardrobe	$908.50		Repairs: sliding wardrobe

The landlord attended via teleconference. The tenant did not.

This was a rehearing on the issue of wardrobe doors only from 11 th January 2024.

The landlord claimed that the wardrobe doors were damaged by the tenants carelessly and was not fair wear and tear.

The insurance excess was $2,500.00. The actual quotation for repair is much less. Therefore, I order the tenant to pay the landlord $908.50 for the damage caused to the wardrobe doors.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4675831 — Property damage at Unit/Flat 613, 223A Green Lane West, Epsom, Auckland

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4675831 — Property damage at Unit/Flat 613, 223A Green Lane West, Epsom, Auckland

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions