What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4763121?

The tribunal order states: Aedan Beisly and Phoebe Khokgawe to pay Summit Property Management

How much money was awarded in case 4763121?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4763121?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4763121?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10155247-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4763121?

The tribunal order states: Aedan Beisly and Phoebe Khokgawe to pay Summit Property Management

How much money was awarded in case 4763121?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4763121?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4763121?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10155247-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 1, 6 Hinau Street, The Brook, Nelson 7010 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4763121 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4763121. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
and the application filing fee of	$20.44		and the application filing fee of
Bond	$650.00

Aedan Beisly and Phoebe Khokgawe to pay Summit Property Management Limited As Agent For Cindy Rigg $420.44 from the bond, being the insurance excess of $400.00 and the application filing fee of $20.44.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $650.00 (6427717-005) immediately apportioned as follows: Summit Property Management Limited As Agent For Cindy Rigg: $420.44 Aedan Beisly and Phoebe Khokgawe: $229.56

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing, conducted via video conference.

The landlord has applied for compensation of an insurance excess incurred by the landlord, via the bond balance and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the 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 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.

“Fair wear” is deterioration caused by the reasonable use of the premises. “Fair tear” is deterioration caused by the ordinary operation of the forces of nature. Importantly, intentional or negligent damage are not fair wear and tear. The landlord must prove that damage is beyond fair wear and tear for compensation.

The kitchen lino was slightly damaged during the tenancy. The tear compromised the waterproofing of the lino and an insurance claim was successfully lodged and settled on an invoice of $1,819.42. The actual excess was $650.00 but the landlord revised the claim for excess down, appropriately, to the $400.00 excess as informed in the tenancy agreement. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The amounts ordered are proved.

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. The lino was approximately three years old but already sun damaged in one area before this tenancy. I have applied an aggressive five-year depreciation and that still results in a liability greater than the reduced excess sought (the depreciated value being $728.00). I therefore award the excess of $400.00, being the lower amount.

Because Summit Property Management Limited As Agent For Cindy Rigg has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4763121. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
and the application filing fee of	$20.44		and the application filing fee of
Bond	$650.00

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing, conducted via video conference.

The landlord has applied for compensation of an insurance excess incurred by the landlord, via the bond balance and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The amounts ordered are proved.

Because Summit Property Management Limited As Agent For Cindy Rigg has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4763121 — Property damage at Unit/Flat 1, 6 Hinau Street, The Brook, Nelson 7010

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4763121 — Property damage at Unit/Flat 1, 6 Hinau Street, The Brook, Nelson 7010

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions