What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4751970?

The tribunal order states: Letitia Ngamira Greenough must pay Guang Yang $413.54 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 4751970?

Cleaning: $597.37 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $50.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $345.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $335.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,265.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4751970?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4751970?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9930080-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4751970?

The tribunal order states: Letitia Ngamira Greenough must pay Guang Yang $413.54 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 4751970?

Cleaning: $597.37 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $50.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $345.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $335.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,265.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4751970?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4751970?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9930080-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

331 Waterloo Road, Waterloo, Lower Hutt 5011 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4751970 — Cleanliness

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4751970 — net $413.54 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning	$50.00	Cleaning
Lawns and Garden work	$345.00	Lawns and Garden work
Rubbish removal	$1,265.00	Rubbish removal
Carpet cleaning	$597.37	Carpet cleaning
Carpet replacement	$335.00	Carpet replacement
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$413.54
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$413.54

The landlord attended the hearing. There was no appearance by the tenant.

The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following 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 (RTA).

The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy. There was limited evidence provided of fly dirt on walls, ceilings, lights and cat hair on a window. The landlord says the photos are indicative of the condition of the whole house. However, in the absence of photos showing the condition of the whole house, I am reducing the claim for cleaning accordingly.

The tenant did not remove all belongings and rubbish nor leave the grounds and lawns in a reasonably tidy condition. The amounts claimed for lawns, gardening and rubbish removal are proved.

I am also satisfied on the evidence that the tenant’s cat/s urinated on the carpets at the premises and the claim for sanitising the carpets is proved.

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.

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 following damage was caused during the tenancy: The carpet in two of the bedrooms was damaged in that the cat urine smell could not be removed and some of the carpet was damaged likely through the tenant’s cats scratching the carpet. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage which I find is intentional. The extent of the damage indicates that the cats repeatedly urinated on the carpet and scratched one area of carpet. Therefore, the tenant has allowed the situation to continue during the tenancy. The tenant knew, or ought to have known, that carpet damage would result.

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 carpet at the start of the tenancy and its likely useful lifespan. The landlord was not sure how old the carpet was, but it was present when they purchased the property in 2015 and they say that it was in normal condition. Therefore, the carpet must be at least 8 years old and likely more than 10 years old. In the absence of adequate evidence of the age of the carpet, I consider the carpet should be fully depreciated. However, I accept that the carpet may have lasted a few more years had it not been damaged by cat urine. Therefore, I award the landlord 10% of the carpet replacement costs for the unintended early replacement. The total costs for carpet and underlay replacement in both the Chem Dry and Oncore invoices was $3,359.15. I award $335.

As the landlord has substantially succeeded with their claims, they are entitled to reimbursement of the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4751970 — net $413.54 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning	$50.00	Cleaning
Lawns and Garden work	$345.00	Lawns and Garden work
Rubbish removal	$1,265.00	Rubbish removal
Carpet cleaning	$597.37	Carpet cleaning
Carpet replacement	$335.00	Carpet replacement
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$413.54
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$413.54

Order

Letitia Ngamira Greenough must pay Guang Yang $413.54 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,199.27 (6242721-003) to Guang Yang immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. There was no appearance by the tenant.
The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following 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 (RTA).
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy. There was limited evidence provided of fly dirt on walls, ceilings, lights and cat hair on a window. The landlord says the photos are indicative of the condition of the whole house. However, in the absence of photos showing the condition of the whole house, I am reducing the claim for cleaning accordingly.
The tenant did not remove all belongings and rubbish nor leave the grounds and lawns in a reasonably tidy condition. The amounts claimed for lawns, gardening and rubbish removal are proved.
I am also satisfied on the evidence that the tenant’s cat/s urinated on the carpets at the premises and the claim for sanitising the carpets is proved.

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.
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 following damage was caused during the tenancy: The carpet in two of the bedrooms was damaged in that the cat urine smell could not be removed and some of the carpet was damaged likely through the tenant’s cats scratching the carpet. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage which I find is intentional. The extent of the damage indicates that the cats repeatedly urinated on the carpet and scratched one area of carpet. Therefore, the tenant has allowed the situation to continue during the tenancy. The tenant knew, or ought to have known, that carpet damage would result.
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 carpet at the start of the tenancy and its likely useful lifespan. The landlord was not sure how old the carpet was, but it was present when they purchased the property in 2015 and they say that it was in normal condition. Therefore, the carpet must be at least 8 years old and likely more than 10 years old. In the absence of adequate evidence of the age of the carpet, I consider the carpet should be fully depreciated. However, I accept that the carpet may have lasted a few more years had it not been damaged by cat urine. Therefore, I award the landlord 10% of the carpet replacement costs for the unintended early replacement. The total costs for carpet and underlay replacement in both the Chem Dry and Oncore invoices was $3,359.15. I award $335.
As the landlord has substantially succeeded with their claims, they are entitled to reimbursement of the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4751970 — Cleanliness at 331 Waterloo Road, Waterloo, Lower Hutt 5011

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4751970 — Cleanliness at 331 Waterloo Road, Waterloo, Lower Hutt 5011

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

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

Frequently asked questions