What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4690629?

The tribunal order states: Zara Dickson must pay Alec George Olsen $10,355.16 immediately, calculated

How much money was awarded in case 4690629?

Cleaning: $1,322.10 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $8,821.43 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $211.63 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4690629?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4690629?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9562952-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4690629?

The tribunal order states: Zara Dickson must pay Alec George Olsen $10,355.16 immediately, calculated

How much money was awarded in case 4690629?

Cleaning: $1,322.10 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $8,821.43 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $211.63 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4690629?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4690629?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9562952-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

4 McHardy Street, Bay View, Napier 4104 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4690629 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4690629 — net $10,355.16 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 23 October 2023	$8,821.43	Rent arrears to 23 October 2023
Cleaning	$1,322.10	Cleaning
Rubbish removal (landfill charges	$211.63	Rubbish removal (landfill charges
Net award	$10,355.16
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$10,355.16

Order

Zara Dickson must pay Alec George Olsen $10,355.16 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing along with a support person.
The tenant did not. The tenant was sent notice of the hearing to the tenancy address as well as her email address which was provided as an address for service on the tenancy agreement.
I am satisfied that in these circumstances all reasonable efforts have been made to serve the application and corresponding documentation on the tenant. In accordance with section 91B(2) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”), I direct that it be treated as though this application has been validly served on the tenant by her email address. I further dispense with the specific service as directed in s91A(2) of the RTA and direct that the tenant be served with this order by her email address.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy was a fixed term tenancy due to end on 26 October 2023. The landlord became concerned with rent arrears and damage to the premises and informed the tenant in writing on 10 August 2023 that the fixed term tenancy would not be renewed. From that point, the tenant stopped all communication with the landlord and stopped paying rent entirely.
The landlord became aware that the tenant had abandoned the property on 10 September 2023. The landlord took possession of the premises and a new tenant moved in on 23 October 2023.
Pursuant to section 61(3) of the RTA, a tenant who abandons the premises shall, notwithstanding any rule of law to the contrary, be liable to pay the rent for any period up to and including, but not after, the earlier of the date of the expiry of the term or the date the landlord re-rents the premises to new tenants.
The amount ordered is proved.

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 and remove all rubbish. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(iii) RTA.
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The landlord has provided photographs of the state of the premises at the end of the tenancy and evidence of the costs incurred in cleaning and rubbish removal.
The amounts ordered are proved.

Is the tenant responsible for the carpet replacement at 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 landlord has claimed the full cost of replacing the carpets throughout the premises due to the extensive stains which he considers to be a combination of paint, wine, and cat urine. The landlord has provided photographs of the stains and a quotation from Flooring Design. The landlord has provided evidence of paying a deposit for the carpet replacement which cannot be completed until the New Year due to delays post Cyclone Gabrielle. The tenancy agreement pre- inspection report makes no references to any carpet stains at the start of the tenancy.
When asked during the hearing, the landlord confirmed that he was waiting until the conclusion of the hearing until they contacted their insurer regarding the carpet replacement and confirmed their excess was $450.00.
My conclusion is that there is likely to have been some carpet stains that occurred during this tenancy. The post tenancy photographs show significant marks present on the carpet. However, in this case the landlord has not in fact replaced the carpet, the tenancy has been re-let. There is an inference in the facts of the premises being re-let, that the staining was not at a level that a prospective tenant would find problematic.
I am also minded that the estimated useful life of carpet in a residential tenancy, according to the Inland Revenue depreciation guides (IR265) is 8 years, and therefore, broadly speaking the carpet would be coming to the end of its estimated useful life for depreciation purposes.
The landlords claim for carpet replacement is accordingly dismissed. Suppression and filing fee
The landlord did not seek a suppression order and specifically stated that they did not wish to be reimbursed the filing fee. T Lee-Lewis 25 October 2023

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4690629 — net $10,355.16 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 23 October 2023	$8,821.43	Rent arrears to 23 October 2023
Cleaning	$1,322.10	Cleaning
Rubbish removal (landfill charges	$211.63	Rubbish removal (landfill charges
Net award	$10,355.16
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$10,355.16

Order

Zara Dickson must pay Alec George Olsen $10,355.16 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing along with a support person.
The tenant did not. The tenant was sent notice of the hearing to the tenancy address as well as her email address which was provided as an address for service on the tenancy agreement.
I am satisfied that in these circumstances all reasonable efforts have been made to serve the application and corresponding documentation on the tenant. In accordance with section 91B(2) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”), I direct that it be treated as though this application has been validly served on the tenant by her email address. I further dispense with the specific service as directed in s91A(2) of the RTA and direct that the tenant be served with this order by her email address.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy was a fixed term tenancy due to end on 26 October 2023. The landlord became concerned with rent arrears and damage to the premises and informed the tenant in writing on 10 August 2023 that the fixed term tenancy would not be renewed. From that point, the tenant stopped all communication with the landlord and stopped paying rent entirely.
The landlord became aware that the tenant had abandoned the property on 10 September 2023. The landlord took possession of the premises and a new tenant moved in on 23 October 2023.
Pursuant to section 61(3) of the RTA, a tenant who abandons the premises shall, notwithstanding any rule of law to the contrary, be liable to pay the rent for any period up to and including, but not after, the earlier of the date of the expiry of the term or the date the landlord re-rents the premises to new tenants.
The amount ordered is proved.

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 and remove all rubbish. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(iii) RTA.
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The landlord has provided photographs of the state of the premises at the end of the tenancy and evidence of the costs incurred in cleaning and rubbish removal.
The amounts ordered are proved.

Is the tenant responsible for the carpet replacement at 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 landlord has claimed the full cost of replacing the carpets throughout the premises due to the extensive stains which he considers to be a combination of paint, wine, and cat urine. The landlord has provided photographs of the stains and a quotation from Flooring Design. The landlord has provided evidence of paying a deposit for the carpet replacement which cannot be completed until the New Year due to delays post Cyclone Gabrielle. The tenancy agreement pre- inspection report makes no references to any carpet stains at the start of the tenancy.
When asked during the hearing, the landlord confirmed that he was waiting until the conclusion of the hearing until they contacted their insurer regarding the carpet replacement and confirmed their excess was $450.00.
My conclusion is that there is likely to have been some carpet stains that occurred during this tenancy. The post tenancy photographs show significant marks present on the carpet. However, in this case the landlord has not in fact replaced the carpet, the tenancy has been re-let. There is an inference in the facts of the premises being re-let, that the staining was not at a level that a prospective tenant would find problematic.
I am also minded that the estimated useful life of carpet in a residential tenancy, according to the Inland Revenue depreciation guides (IR265) is 8 years, and therefore, broadly speaking the carpet would be coming to the end of its estimated useful life for depreciation purposes.
The landlords claim for carpet replacement is accordingly dismissed. Suppression and filing fee
The landlord did not seek a suppression order and specifically stated that they did not wish to be reimbursed the filing fee. T Lee-Lewis 25 October 2023

Tenancy Tribunal case 4690629 — Rent arrears at 4 McHardy Street, Bay View, Napier 4104

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4690629 — Rent arrears at 4 McHardy Street, Bay View, Napier 4104

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Is the tenant responsible for the carpet replacement at the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Is the tenant responsible for the carpet replacement at the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions