What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4695709?

The tribunal order states: Taneeka leigh Mason and Conrad Tamati Kawana- Mariu must pay Invercargill

How much money was awarded in case 4695709?

Cleaning: $250.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Insurance Final Inspection: $34.50 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $1,702.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 4695709 D…: $154.73 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $327.75 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $2,600.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,046.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4695709?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4695709?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10128725-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4695709?

The tribunal order states: Taneeka leigh Mason and Conrad Tamati Kawana- Mariu must pay Invercargill

How much money was awarded in case 4695709?

Cleaning: $250.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Insurance Final Inspection: $34.50 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $1,702.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 4695709 D…: $154.73 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $327.75 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $2,600.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,046.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4695709?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4695709?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10128725-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

517 Tweed Street, Newfield, Invercargill 9812 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4695709 — Property damage

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4695709 — net $4,455.92 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Previous order application 4695709 dated	$154.73	Previous order application 4695709 dated
Lock/key replacement	$327.75	Lock/key replacement
Rubbish removal: inside	$1,046.50	Rubbish removal: inside
Lawns and Garden work	$1,702.00	Lawns and Garden work
Insurance final inspection	$34.50	Insurance final inspection
Meth testing/Cleaning	$250.00	Meth testing/Cleaning
Insurance excess x4	$2,600.00	Insurance excess x4
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$4,455.92
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,455.92

Ms Mason attended the hearing. Mr Kawana-Mariu remains in prison.

The landlord previously applied for termination. That order (4695709) was granted and has been incorporated into this order.

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 tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish.

The tenant did not return the keys.

The amounts ordered are proved. Ms Mason advised that she was very sorry and tried her best to clean up. She is a mother of young children. It was agreed that the other tenant caused the damage and issues in this tenancy.

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 careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.

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.

Again, Ms Mason was very sorry. It was accepted that it was the other named tenant who caused this damage. However, both tenants are unfortunately liable.

There was significant damage caused at the property. Most of the walls had holes punched in them, carpet was destroyed the kitchen also damaged significantly. There was twenty one excess claims for insurance. Fortunately for the tenants the owner negotiated this down to four in total.

The damage was significant and far more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The amounts ordered are proved.

The landlord attempted to claim for damage that had been repaired when all was well in the tenancy, a door and mail box. However, there is insufficient evidence to support that this occurred due to the intentional damage by the tenants. Therefore these claims are not successful.

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.

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

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4695709 — net $4,455.92 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Previous order application 4695709 dated	$154.73	Previous order application 4695709 dated
Lock/key replacement	$327.75	Lock/key replacement
Rubbish removal: inside	$1,046.50	Rubbish removal: inside
Lawns and Garden work	$1,702.00	Lawns and Garden work
Insurance final inspection	$34.50	Insurance final inspection
Meth testing/Cleaning	$250.00	Meth testing/Cleaning
Insurance excess x4	$2,600.00	Insurance excess x4
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$4,455.92
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,455.92

Order

Taneeka leigh Mason and Conrad Tamati Kawana- Mariu must pay Invercargill Property Management Limited $4,455.92 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,680.00 (5120548-011) to Invercargill Property Management Limited immediately.

Reasons

Ms Mason attended the hearing. Mr Kawana-Mariu remains in prison.
The landlord previously applied for termination. That order (4695709) was granted and has been incorporated into this order.

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 tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish.
The tenant did not return the keys.
The amounts ordered are proved. Ms Mason advised that she was very sorry and tried her best to clean up. She is a mother of young children. It was agreed that the other tenant caused the damage and issues in this tenancy.

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 careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.
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.
Again, Ms Mason was very sorry. It was accepted that it was the other named tenant who caused this damage. However, both tenants are unfortunately liable.
There was significant damage caused at the property. Most of the walls had holes punched in them, carpet was destroyed the kitchen also damaged significantly. There was twenty one excess claims for insurance. Fortunately for the tenants the owner negotiated this down to four in total.
The damage was significant and far more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved.
The landlord attempted to claim for damage that had been repaired when all was well in the tenancy, a door and mail box. However, there is insufficient evidence to support that this occurred due to the intentional damage by the tenants. Therefore these claims are not successful.
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.
Because Invercargill Property Management Limited has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4695709 — Property damage at 517 Tweed Street, Newfield, Invercargill 9812

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4695709 — Property damage at 517 Tweed Street, Newfield, Invercargill 9812

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