What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4773400?

The tribunal order states: Louis Falefa and Bernadette Singh must pay Auckland Property Management

How much money was awarded in case 4773400?

Cleaning: $1,250.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,600.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,250.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,250.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $189.05 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4773400?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4773400?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10559148-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4773400?

The tribunal order states: Louis Falefa and Bernadette Singh must pay Auckland Property Management

How much money was awarded in case 4773400?

Cleaning: $1,250.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,600.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,250.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,250.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $189.05 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4773400?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4773400?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10559148-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

63A Archibald Road, Kelston, Auckland 0602 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4773400 — Property damage

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4773400 — net $5,559.49 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears (to 22/11/2023	$1,600.00	Rent arrears (to 22/11/2023
Repairs: Insurance excess for fire damage to the deck	$1,250.00	Repairs: Insurance excess for fire damage to the deck
Repairs: Insurance excess for chipped tile replacement in entrance way	$1,250.00	Repairs: Insurance excess for chipped tile replacement in entrance way
Carpet Cleaning: Insurance excess for damage to the composite laminate floor in the lounge	$1,250.00	Carpet Cleaning: Insurance excess for damage to the composite laminate floor in the lounge
Water rates: (from September to 22 November 2023	$189.05	6. The Mediator’s Order dated 26 January 2024 records the tenants’ agreement that they owed $189.05 in water rates arrears at the end of the tenancy.
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$5,559.49
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,559.49

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4773400 — net $5,559.49 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.

Claim

Landlord

Tenant

Reason

Rent arrears (to 22/11/2023

$1,600.00

Rent arrears (to 22/11/2023

Repairs: Insurance excess for fire damage to the deck

$1,250.00

Repairs: Insurance excess for fire damage to the deck

Repairs: Insurance excess for chipped tile replacement in entrance way

$1,250.00

Repairs: Insurance excess for chipped tile replacement in entrance way

Carpet Cleaning: Insurance excess for damage to the composite laminate floor in the lounge

$1,250.00

Carpet Cleaning: Insurance excess for damage to the composite laminate floor in the lounge

Water rates: (from September to 22 November 2023

$189.05

6. The Mediator’s Order dated 26 January 2024 records the tenants’ agreement that they owed $189.05 in water rates arrears at the end of the tenancy.

Filing fee reimbursement

$20.44

Filing fee reimbursement

Net award

$5,559.49

Total payable by Tenant to Landlord

$5,559.49

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not.

I am satisfied that the tenant had received proper notice of the hearing time, date and place and chose not to attend.

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

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

The tenancy ended on 22 November 2023. The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.

The tenant owed $4,800.00 in rent arrears at the end of the tenancy. A Mediator’s Order dated 26 January 2024 records that the parties agreed to the full bond of $3,200.00 to be refunded to the landlord to offset some of these rent arrears. The remaining $1,600.00 rent arrears remains outstanding as at today.

The Mediator’s Order dated 26 January 2024 records the tenants’ agreement that they owed $189.05 in water rates arrears at the end of the tenancy. The landlord has confirmed this amount remains outstanding as at today.

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 careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.

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.

The following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. Holes in the composite laminate floor covering in the lounge; b. A chip in an entranceway tile; and c. Extensive damage to the deck from heat or fire.

The Mediator’s Order dated 26 January 2024 records the tenants disagreeing that they caused this damage intentionally or carelessly and setting down a further mediation to address this issue.

The landlord has confirmed the tenants did not attend the second mediation as the matter was escalated to the Tribunal.

The landlord has proven that the damage to the composite laminate flooring has occurred on several occasions, most likely by the same piece of furniture piercing it. The landlord says the tenants have been unable to provide a plausible explanation for how this damage occurred and stated the damage was not noticed or noted at the last property inspection on 5 September 2023. This indicates the damage was covered by a mat or occurred between 5 September 2023 and 22 November 2023. The tenants did not notify the landlord when the damage occurred. I am satisfied this damage was because of a careless act or omission by the tenants and the tenants have not disproven liability for it.

The landlord has proven the chip to the tile in the entrance way occurred during the tenancy. The landlord says the tenants were unable to provide a plausible explanation for how this damage occurred and stated the damage was not noticed or noted at the last property inspection on 5 September 2023. This indicates the damage occurred between 5 September 2023 and 22 November 2023. The tenants did not notify the landlord when the damage occurred. I am satisfied this damage was because of a careless act or omission by the tenants and the tenants have not disproven liability for it.

The damage to the deck can only be because of a deliberate/intentional or careless act(s) by the tenants. The landlord stated the tenants had told him they had a brazier (a container used to burn charcoal or other solid fuel for cooking, heating or cultural rituals) on the deck, left it burning overnight and it burnt the deck. I am satisfied from the burn patterns on the deck, the brazier was in several different locations on the deck at different times causing multiple burn sites. The landlord provided evidence that at the property inspections the burn sites were covered by a deck mat and only became evident to the landlord when the tenants moved their deck furniture and mat at the end of the tenancy. The landlord also says the tenants never informed it of this damage when it occurred.

I am satisfied the damage outlined in paragraph [13] is more than fair wear and tear, and the landlord says the tenants have not disproved liability for the damage during the mediation nor have they provided and evidence to the Tribunal to disprove the landlord’s claims.

The amounts awarded for the three sets of damage have been calculated using the insurance excess of $1,250.00 per claim as this is less than 4 weeks of rent (see s49B(3)(a) of the RTA).

The amounts ordered are proved.

I have considered 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 considered the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Reimbursement of the filing fee

Because Auckland Property Management Limited As Agent For S Raj Goundar has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4773400 — net $5,559.49 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears (to 22/11/2023	$1,600.00	Rent arrears (to 22/11/2023
Repairs: Insurance excess for fire damage to the deck	$1,250.00	Repairs: Insurance excess for fire damage to the deck
Repairs: Insurance excess for chipped tile replacement in entrance way	$1,250.00	Repairs: Insurance excess for chipped tile replacement in entrance way
Carpet Cleaning: Insurance excess for damage to the composite laminate floor in the lounge	$1,250.00	Carpet Cleaning: Insurance excess for damage to the composite laminate floor in the lounge
Water rates: (from September to 22 November 2023	$189.05	6. The Mediator’s Order dated 26 January 2024 records the tenants’ agreement that they owed $189.05 in water rates arrears at the end of the tenancy.
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$5,559.49
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,559.49

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4773400 — net $5,559.49 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.

Claim

Landlord

Tenant

Reason

Rent arrears (to 22/11/2023

$1,600.00

Rent arrears (to 22/11/2023

Repairs: Insurance excess for fire damage to the deck

$1,250.00

Repairs: Insurance excess for fire damage to the deck

Repairs: Insurance excess for chipped tile replacement in entrance way

$1,250.00

Repairs: Insurance excess for chipped tile replacement in entrance way

Carpet Cleaning: Insurance excess for damage to the composite laminate floor in the lounge

$1,250.00

Carpet Cleaning: Insurance excess for damage to the composite laminate floor in the lounge

Water rates: (from September to 22 November 2023

$189.05

6. The Mediator’s Order dated 26 January 2024 records the tenants’ agreement that they owed $189.05 in water rates arrears at the end of the tenancy.

Filing fee reimbursement

$20.44

Filing fee reimbursement

Net award

$5,559.49

Total payable by Tenant to Landlord

$5,559.49

Order

Louis Falefa and Bernadette Singh must pay Auckland Property Management Limited As Agent For S Raj Goundar $5,559.49 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not.
I am satisfied that the tenant had received proper notice of the hearing time, date and place and chose not to attend.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

The tenancy ended on 22 November 2023. The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.
The tenant owed $4,800.00 in rent arrears at the end of the tenancy. A Mediator’s Order dated 26 January 2024 records that the parties agreed to the full bond of $3,200.00 to be refunded to the landlord to offset some of these rent arrears. The remaining $1,600.00 rent arrears remains outstanding as at today.
The Mediator’s Order dated 26 January 2024 records the tenants’ agreement that they owed $189.05 in water rates arrears at the end of the tenancy. The landlord has confirmed this amount remains outstanding as at today.

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 careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.
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.
The following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. Holes in the composite laminate floor covering in the lounge; b. A chip in an entranceway tile; and c. Extensive damage to the deck from heat or fire.
The Mediator’s Order dated 26 January 2024 records the tenants disagreeing that they caused this damage intentionally or carelessly and setting down a further mediation to address this issue.
The landlord has confirmed the tenants did not attend the second mediation as the matter was escalated to the Tribunal.
The landlord has proven that the damage to the composite laminate flooring has occurred on several occasions, most likely by the same piece of furniture piercing it. The landlord says the tenants have been unable to provide a plausible explanation for how this damage occurred and stated the damage was not noticed or noted at the last property inspection on 5 September 2023. This indicates the damage was covered by a mat or occurred between 5 September 2023 and 22 November 2023. The tenants did not notify the landlord when the damage occurred. I am satisfied this damage was because of a careless act or omission by the tenants and the tenants have not disproven liability for it.
The landlord has proven the chip to the tile in the entrance way occurred during the tenancy. The landlord says the tenants were unable to provide a plausible explanation for how this damage occurred and stated the damage was not noticed or noted at the last property inspection on 5 September 2023. This indicates the damage occurred between 5 September 2023 and 22 November 2023. The tenants did not notify the landlord when the damage occurred. I am satisfied this damage was because of a careless act or omission by the tenants and the tenants have not disproven liability for it.
The damage to the deck can only be because of a deliberate/intentional or careless act(s) by the tenants. The landlord stated the tenants had told him they had a brazier (a container used to burn charcoal or other solid fuel for cooking, heating or cultural rituals) on the deck, left it burning overnight and it burnt the deck. I am satisfied from the burn patterns on the deck, the brazier was in several different locations on the deck at different times causing multiple burn sites. The landlord provided evidence that at the property inspections the burn sites were covered by a deck mat and only became evident to the landlord when the tenants moved their deck furniture and mat at the end of the tenancy. The landlord also says the tenants never informed it of this damage when it occurred.
I am satisfied the damage outlined in paragraph [13] is more than fair wear and tear, and the landlord says the tenants have not disproved liability for the damage during the mediation nor have they provided and evidence to the Tribunal to disprove the landlord’s claims.
The amounts awarded for the three sets of damage have been calculated using the insurance excess of $1,250.00 per claim as this is less than 4 weeks of rent (see s49B(3)(a) of the RTA).
The amounts ordered are proved.
I have considered 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 considered the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Reimbursement of the filing fee
Because Auckland Property Management Limited As Agent For S Raj Goundar has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4773400 — Property damage at 63A Archibald Road, Kelston, Auckland 0602

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4773400 — Property damage at 63A Archibald Road, Kelston, Auckland 0602

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

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?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions