What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4735493?

The tribunal order states: Bin Li must pay BHAK Investment Limited $3,065.98 immediately, calculated

How much money was awarded in case 4735493?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,380.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $400.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $3,528.57 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $336.97 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4735493?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4735493?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10411486-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4735493?

The tribunal order states: Bin Li must pay BHAK Investment Limited $3,065.98 immediately, calculated

How much money was awarded in case 4735493?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,380.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $400.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $3,528.57 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $336.97 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4735493?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4735493?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10411486-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

117 Forrest Hill Road, Forrest Hill, Auckland 0620 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4735493 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4735493 — net $3,065.98 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$3,528.57	Rent arrears
Wall and door repairs	$1,380.00	Wall and door repairs
Curtain replacement	$400.00	Curtain replacement
Cleaning, gardedn work, rubbish removal	$336.97	Cleaning, gardedn work, rubbish removal
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,065.98
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,065.98

Order

Bin Li must pay BHAK Investment Limited $3,065.98 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
The Bond Centre must pay the bond of $2,600.00 (5048522-007) to BHAK Investment Limited, immediately

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The assistance of an interpreter was provided.
Shortly before the hearing the tenant asked to appear by videoconference as he was overseas. That request could not be accommodated and the tenant appeared by teleconference. The Claims
The tenant lodged an application on 9 November 2023 seeking work orders to address a claimed mould problem at the premises, as well as compensation and exemplary damages. An Order for early termination of the fixed term tenancy was also sought.
A mediation was held on 4 December 2023 which resulted in an agreement that the tenancy would end on 20 December 2023, rather than at the end of the fixed term on 18 February 2024, with a final inspection to be carried out on 21 December 2023.
Other claims were not resolved.
The landlord filed a cross application on 7 January 2024 after the tenancy had ended, seeking compensation and rent arrears.

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

As noted, the tenancy ended on 20 December 2023 by agreement as recorded in the Mediator’s Order.
The landlord has provided a rent summary proving the rent owed to that date. The tenant paid rent up to the rent week ending 12 November 2023 but then stopped. Mould
Each party claims that the other is responsible for the prevalence of mould at the premises.
The landlord has provided a Healthy Homes assessment dated 11 January 2021, following an inspection on 15 December 2020. The report assesses the premises as compliant with all healthy homes’ standards, including those for ventilation, moisture ingress, ventilation and drainage.
An updated report dated 18 January 2024 was also provided. That update also assesses the premises as compliant with all healthy homes standards.
The report specifically notes, “Home has no visible mould”.
The report also comments, “No dampness or v visible mould is a good sign that this home is warm and dry. It's possible there may be mould in other less accessible places in the home or at certain times of the year so keep an eye out. You can clean mould using a solution of 70 mls of white vinegar and 30 mls of water sprayed on affected areas. Leave up to an hour then wipe off with a clean damp cloth. Be particularly wary of mould appearing in wardrobes and other enclosed spaces come up and continue earring to ensure your breathing us fresh air. The presence of mould in a home indicates inadequate management of temperature (too cold) and moisture (too damp). Solving this issue requires a mix of home based features eg insulation, draught stopping, curtains, good heating and mechanical extract ventilation of kitchens and bathrooms, and good occupant behaviour eg heating/ airing the home, not washing inside and avoiding unflued gas heaters. It is important to keep on top of even small specks of mould, these can easily be cleaned and their recurrence managed by heating and airing”
The photographic evidence provided by the tenant shows some areas of the premises affected by mould.
The tenant has also provided evidence to show that his daughter sought medical treatment for symptoms that might be consistent with exposure to mould.
However, the available evidence suggests that the “home based features” of mould control referred to in the above extract from the 2024 healthy homes assessment, “insulation, draught stopping, curtains, good heating and mechanical extract ventilation of kitchens and bathrooms” were adequately provided by the landlord.
The evidence does not prove a breach by the landlord failed of its obligation to provide Healthy Homes compliant premises in an adequate state of maintenance and repair.
Those claims by the tenant are declined.
The landlord claims compensation for the cost of painting the bathroom ceiling and part of one of the bedrooms, due to mould damage.
The photographic evidence provided does show a need for the bathroom ceiling to be painted, with paint peeling from the ceiling. That evidence does not prove that the need for the repainting was directly as a result of a breach of the tenant’s obligations.
That claim is declined. Utilities
The tenant says that he should be compensated because the landlord used a room on the property for teaching purposes, using water and electricity that the tenant paid for.
The landlord has provided evidence which proves that there were electricity and water check meters installed at the premises which enabled measurement of the water and electricity consumed by the landlord’s use of that room.
Spreadsheets, including evidence of the meter reading has been provided to prove calculation of the parties’ respective usage. They show that the tenant has not been required to pay for electricity or water used by the landlord.

Did the tenant meet his obligations at the end of the tenancy?

A tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and must remove all rubbish.
Photographs from the end of tenancy inspection, which the tenant did not take part in, show that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy. Rubbish was left in the premises and around the property. Lawns were not left in a tidy condition.
The landlord did the clean up work through its director/ owners. Charges are claims for labour at $30.00 per hour, for hire of a trailer and for dump fees. The charges are reasonable, and the expenses are proved by receipts provided. I approve the landlord’s claims.

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.
The landlord’s evidence satisfies met that the following damage was caused during the tenancy: Broken window glass Broken electrical socket Damage to walls by drawing and holes Damage to 3 doors Damage to skirting boards
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The landlord does not seek compensation for all the repair costs.
The amounts claimed are reasonable and are proved by a tradesperson’s invoice provide by the landlord.
The evidence provided by the landlord persuades me that curtains which were new at the start of the tenancy were left unhung and in an unusable condition at the end of the tenancy.
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. The landlord has proven a replacement cost for the curtains of $511.80. A modest depreciation allowance is appropriate.
Because the landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4735493 — net $3,065.98 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$3,528.57	Rent arrears
Wall and door repairs	$1,380.00	Wall and door repairs
Curtain replacement	$400.00	Curtain replacement
Cleaning, gardedn work, rubbish removal	$336.97	Cleaning, gardedn work, rubbish removal
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,065.98
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,065.98

Order

Bin Li must pay BHAK Investment Limited $3,065.98 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
The Bond Centre must pay the bond of $2,600.00 (5048522-007) to BHAK Investment Limited, immediately

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The assistance of an interpreter was provided.
Shortly before the hearing the tenant asked to appear by videoconference as he was overseas. That request could not be accommodated and the tenant appeared by teleconference. The Claims
The tenant lodged an application on 9 November 2023 seeking work orders to address a claimed mould problem at the premises, as well as compensation and exemplary damages. An Order for early termination of the fixed term tenancy was also sought.
A mediation was held on 4 December 2023 which resulted in an agreement that the tenancy would end on 20 December 2023, rather than at the end of the fixed term on 18 February 2024, with a final inspection to be carried out on 21 December 2023.
Other claims were not resolved.
The landlord filed a cross application on 7 January 2024 after the tenancy had ended, seeking compensation and rent arrears.

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

As noted, the tenancy ended on 20 December 2023 by agreement as recorded in the Mediator’s Order.
The landlord has provided a rent summary proving the rent owed to that date. The tenant paid rent up to the rent week ending 12 November 2023 but then stopped. Mould
Each party claims that the other is responsible for the prevalence of mould at the premises.
The landlord has provided a Healthy Homes assessment dated 11 January 2021, following an inspection on 15 December 2020. The report assesses the premises as compliant with all healthy homes’ standards, including those for ventilation, moisture ingress, ventilation and drainage.
An updated report dated 18 January 2024 was also provided. That update also assesses the premises as compliant with all healthy homes standards.
The report specifically notes, “Home has no visible mould”.
The report also comments, “No dampness or v visible mould is a good sign that this home is warm and dry. It's possible there may be mould in other less accessible places in the home or at certain times of the year so keep an eye out. You can clean mould using a solution of 70 mls of white vinegar and 30 mls of water sprayed on affected areas. Leave up to an hour then wipe off with a clean damp cloth. Be particularly wary of mould appearing in wardrobes and other enclosed spaces come up and continue earring to ensure your breathing us fresh air. The presence of mould in a home indicates inadequate management of temperature (too cold) and moisture (too damp). Solving this issue requires a mix of home based features eg insulation, draught stopping, curtains, good heating and mechanical extract ventilation of kitchens and bathrooms, and good occupant behaviour eg heating/ airing the home, not washing inside and avoiding unflued gas heaters. It is important to keep on top of even small specks of mould, these can easily be cleaned and their recurrence managed by heating and airing”
The photographic evidence provided by the tenant shows some areas of the premises affected by mould.
The tenant has also provided evidence to show that his daughter sought medical treatment for symptoms that might be consistent with exposure to mould.
However, the available evidence suggests that the “home based features” of mould control referred to in the above extract from the 2024 healthy homes assessment, “insulation, draught stopping, curtains, good heating and mechanical extract ventilation of kitchens and bathrooms” were adequately provided by the landlord.
The evidence does not prove a breach by the landlord failed of its obligation to provide Healthy Homes compliant premises in an adequate state of maintenance and repair.
Those claims by the tenant are declined.
The landlord claims compensation for the cost of painting the bathroom ceiling and part of one of the bedrooms, due to mould damage.
The photographic evidence provided does show a need for the bathroom ceiling to be painted, with paint peeling from the ceiling. That evidence does not prove that the need for the repainting was directly as a result of a breach of the tenant’s obligations.
That claim is declined. Utilities
The tenant says that he should be compensated because the landlord used a room on the property for teaching purposes, using water and electricity that the tenant paid for.
The landlord has provided evidence which proves that there were electricity and water check meters installed at the premises which enabled measurement of the water and electricity consumed by the landlord’s use of that room.
Spreadsheets, including evidence of the meter reading has been provided to prove calculation of the parties’ respective usage. They show that the tenant has not been required to pay for electricity or water used by the landlord.

Did the tenant meet his obligations at the end of the tenancy?

A tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and must remove all rubbish.
Photographs from the end of tenancy inspection, which the tenant did not take part in, show that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy. Rubbish was left in the premises and around the property. Lawns were not left in a tidy condition.
The landlord did the clean up work through its director/ owners. Charges are claims for labour at $30.00 per hour, for hire of a trailer and for dump fees. The charges are reasonable, and the expenses are proved by receipts provided. I approve the landlord’s claims.

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.
The landlord’s evidence satisfies met that the following damage was caused during the tenancy: Broken window glass Broken electrical socket Damage to walls by drawing and holes Damage to 3 doors Damage to skirting boards
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The landlord does not seek compensation for all the repair costs.
The amounts claimed are reasonable and are proved by a tradesperson’s invoice provide by the landlord.
The evidence provided by the landlord persuades me that curtains which were new at the start of the tenancy were left unhung and in an unusable condition at the end of the tenancy.
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. The landlord has proven a replacement cost for the curtains of $511.80. A modest depreciation allowance is appropriate.
Because the landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4735493 — Rent arrears at 117 Forrest Hill Road, Forrest Hill, Auckland 0620

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4735493 — Rent arrears at 117 Forrest Hill Road, Forrest Hill, Auckland 0620

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

Did the tenant meet his 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

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

Did the tenant meet his 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