What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4769197?

The tribunal order states: Shane Meehan must pay Reh Property Management Limited As Agent For

How much money was awarded in case 4769197?

Carpet Assessment: $150.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $2,009.33 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4769197?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4769197?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10049321-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4769197?

The tribunal order states: Shane Meehan must pay Reh Property Management Limited As Agent For

How much money was awarded in case 4769197?

Carpet Assessment: $150.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $2,009.33 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4769197?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4769197?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10049321-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 3, 183 Featherston Street, Palmerston North, Tenancy Tribunal Case 4769197 — Property damage

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4769197 — net $2,179.77 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Replacement carpet	$2,009.33	Replacement carpet
Carpet assessment	$150.00	Carpet assessment
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,179.77
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,179.77

The landlord attended the hearing, but the tenant did not.

The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

The landlord claims the tenant had a pet at the property without consent and the carpet was so badly urine stained throughout that it required replacement.

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.

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.

At the commencement of the tenancy the carpets were in good condition. They were new in 2018.

At the end of the tenancy the carpets were found to be badly urine stained throughout. The urine smell was severe. The tenant had kept an unconsented animal at the premises.

An assessment was undertaken by Jae, a professional carpet cleaning company. The report noted: Unit three 183 Featherston Street has severe urine staining throughout the property in two bedrooms and the lounge. I’ve identified the affected areas using a black light. I have taken some photos and drawn a plan of the affected area as not all of the areas show up well in the photos. The smell is very severe and there are multiple urine stains in each area. The affected areas are to severe to successfully treat and I feel the underlay will also be affected as well as the floor. Our advice is that the affected carpet, underlay and smooth edge be disposed of and the floor sealed to encapsulate any remaining odour to achieve the best result. Areas Lounge 1, Bedroom 1, Bedroom 2,

I am satisfied. on the basis of this report, and after the viewing the photographic evidence that there is no option but to replace the carpets as advised in the report.

The damage is so extensive that I regard the damage as intentional, having let the animal urinate inside and letting that behaviour to continue, with the only outcome being damage to the carpet. As such the tenant is liable for cost for replacement carpet in bedrooms 1 and 2 and the lounge area.

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 carpet was 5 years old and the expected life of carpet for depreciation purposes is 15 years.

As the landlord has been successful in their application the filing fee is awarded.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4769197 — net $2,179.77 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Replacement carpet	$2,009.33	Replacement carpet
Carpet assessment	$150.00	Carpet assessment
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,179.77
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,179.77

Order

Shane Meehan must pay Reh Property Management Limited As Agent For Christian Hicks $2,179.77 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The filing fee of $20.44 is awarded to REH Property Managemet Ltd as agent for Christian Hicks

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing, but the tenant did not.
The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The landlord claims the tenant had a pet at the property without consent and the carpet was so badly urine stained throughout that it required replacement.

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.
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.
At the commencement of the tenancy the carpets were in good condition. They were new in 2018.
At the end of the tenancy the carpets were found to be badly urine stained throughout. The urine smell was severe. The tenant had kept an unconsented animal at the premises.
An assessment was undertaken by Jae, a professional carpet cleaning company. The report noted: Unit three 183 Featherston Street has severe urine staining throughout the property in two bedrooms and the lounge. I’ve identified the affected areas using a black light. I have taken some photos and drawn a plan of the affected area as not all of the areas show up well in the photos. The smell is very severe and there are multiple urine stains in each area. The affected areas are to severe to successfully treat and I feel the underlay will also be affected as well as the floor. Our advice is that the affected carpet, underlay and smooth edge be disposed of and the floor sealed to encapsulate any remaining odour to achieve the best result. Areas Lounge 1, Bedroom 1, Bedroom 2,
I am satisfied. on the basis of this report, and after the viewing the photographic evidence that there is no option but to replace the carpets as advised in the report.
The damage is so extensive that I regard the damage as intentional, having let the animal urinate inside and letting that behaviour to continue, with the only outcome being damage to the carpet. As such the tenant is liable for cost for replacement carpet in bedrooms 1 and 2 and the lounge area.
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 carpet was 5 years old and the expected life of carpet for depreciation purposes is 15 years.
As the landlord has been successful in their application the filing fee is awarded.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4769197 — Property damage at Unit/Flat 3, 183 Featherston Street, Palmerston North,

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4769197 — Property damage at Unit/Flat 3, 183 Featherston Street, Palmerston North,

At a glance

Award balance

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

Award balance

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