What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4731695?

The tribunal order states: Kolinias Teisna Palu must pay Charles Investments Limited $2,728.83

How much money was awarded in case 4731695?

Individual award amounts are in the official MoJ PDF. Claim amounts appear on this page when claims and net totals reconcile.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4731695?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4731695?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10050079-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4731695?

The tribunal order states: Kolinias Teisna Palu must pay Charles Investments Limited $2,728.83

How much money was awarded in case 4731695?

Individual award amounts are in the official MoJ PDF. Claim amounts appear on this page when claims and net totals reconcile.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4731695?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4731695?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10050079-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 1, 17 Solent Street, Mangere, Auckland 2022 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4731695 — Property damage

Order

Kolinias Teisna Palu must pay Charles Investments Limited $2,728.83 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The applicant landlord attended the hearing. There was no appearance of the tenant.
This hearing was adjourned from 6 December 2023 for the landlord to file further evidence.
The landlord stated that the tenancy ended on 13 December 2023.
Today the landlord is seeking an order for rent arrears, compensation for the cost of lock replacement, reimbursement of the insurance excess for damage repairs and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The onus is on the landlord to prove the claims on the balance of probabilities.
The bond has already been refunded to the landlord prior to the hearing and this has been applied to reduce the debt ordered today.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 13 December 2023. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount of $1680.00 owing at the end of the tenancy.

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 landlord has not provided invoices for cleaning and rubbish removal and is not seeking compensation for this today.
The tenant changed the locks during the tenancy and did not return any keys.
The amount ordered is proved. The landlord provided a copy of the exit inspection recording that the keys were not returned, communication with the contractor who changed the locks and an invoice for $948.29.

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 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.
Today the landlord is seeking compensation for damage caused during the tenancy to walls and doors. The landlord has provided entry and exit inspection photographs. Although there were some marks when this tenancy commenced, I am satisfied that the premises are significantly more marked at the end of this tenancy. The damage is more than fair wear and tear and is carelessly caused, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord provided evidence that the insurance excess for the damaged walls and doors is $3250.00.
The amount of $3080.00 will be ordered as this is equivalent to four week’s rent.
The landlord advised that there was other intentional damage to the premises, but this is not included in the claim today.
The amounts ordered are proved.
Because Charles Investments Limited has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Order

Kolinias Teisna Palu must pay Charles Investments Limited $2,728.83 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The applicant landlord attended the hearing. There was no appearance of the tenant.
This hearing was adjourned from 6 December 2023 for the landlord to file further evidence.
The landlord stated that the tenancy ended on 13 December 2023.
Today the landlord is seeking an order for rent arrears, compensation for the cost of lock replacement, reimbursement of the insurance excess for damage repairs and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The onus is on the landlord to prove the claims on the balance of probabilities.
The bond has already been refunded to the landlord prior to the hearing and this has been applied to reduce the debt ordered today.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 13 December 2023. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount of $1680.00 owing at the end of the tenancy.

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 landlord has not provided invoices for cleaning and rubbish removal and is not seeking compensation for this today.
The tenant changed the locks during the tenancy and did not return any keys.
The amount ordered is proved. The landlord provided a copy of the exit inspection recording that the keys were not returned, communication with the contractor who changed the locks and an invoice for $948.29.

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 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.
Today the landlord is seeking compensation for damage caused during the tenancy to walls and doors. The landlord has provided entry and exit inspection photographs. Although there were some marks when this tenancy commenced, I am satisfied that the premises are significantly more marked at the end of this tenancy. The damage is more than fair wear and tear and is carelessly caused, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord provided evidence that the insurance excess for the damaged walls and doors is $3250.00.
The amount of $3080.00 will be ordered as this is equivalent to four week’s rent.
The landlord advised that there was other intentional damage to the premises, but this is not included in the claim today.
The amounts ordered are proved.
Because Charles Investments Limited has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4731695 — Property damage at Unit/Flat 1, 17 Solent Street, Mangere, Auckland 2022

Tenancy Tribunal case 4731695 — Property damage at Unit/Flat 1, 17 Solent Street, Mangere, Auckland 2022

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 damage to the premises?

Property management

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 damage to the premises?

Property management