What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4793057?

The tribunal order states: Juanita Harrison must pay Inspire Property Management Limited As Agent For

How much money was awarded in case 4793057?

Cleaning: $251.22 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $2,500.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $314.52 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4793057?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Exemplary damages, Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4793057?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10715621-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4793057?

The tribunal order states: Juanita Harrison must pay Inspire Property Management Limited As Agent For

How much money was awarded in case 4793057?

Cleaning: $251.22 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $2,500.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $314.52 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4793057?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Exemplary damages, Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4793057?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10715621-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

88 Lothian Crescent, Strathern, Invercargill 9812 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4793057 — Property damage

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4793057 — net $4,065.74 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Insurance excess	$2,500.00	Insurance excess
Lock/key replacement	$314.52	Lock/key replacement
Electricity for the clean up	$251.22	Electricity for the clean up
Exemplary damages	$1,000.00	Exemplary damages
Net award	$4,065.74
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,065.74

The tenant failed to attend today’s hearing.

The landlord applied to terminate the tenancy in October 2023 and this was granted. Rent arrears are now with a debt collection agency. This application is for compensation in relation to the high levels of Meth contamination 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. The tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.

The tenant did not return the keys.

The amounts ordered are 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 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:

The meth testing showed a high level of meth contamination, as a result the damage was to the floorings, drapes and associated damages with the clean up. The landlord is seeking the excess for the insurance that will cover the damages in excess of $9000.00.

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.

Inspire Property Management Limited As Agent For Chong Dee Koo Lydia Shuck Ting Lim claims the tenant has used the premises unlawfully, by using or allowing others to use illegal drugs in the home.

A tenant must not use the premises or permit the premises to be used for an unlawful purpose. See section 40(2)(b) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $1,800.00. See section 40(3A)(c) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

At the commencement of the tenancy there was a clear test. At the conclusion of the tenancy the levels of Methamphetamine detected were very high. On the evidence before me I find that the tenant has committed an unlawful act.

Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. See section 109(3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

The issues associated with Methamphetamine is well publicised. There must be an award of damages accordingly.

Because Inspire Property Management Limited As Agent For Chong Dee Koo Lydia Shuck Ting Lim has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4793057 — net $4,065.74 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Insurance excess	$2,500.00	Insurance excess
Lock/key replacement	$314.52	Lock/key replacement
Electricity for the clean up	$251.22	Electricity for the clean up
Exemplary damages	$1,000.00	Exemplary damages
Net award	$4,065.74
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,065.74

Order

Juanita Harrison must pay Inspire Property Management Limited As Agent For Chong Dee Koo Lydia Shuck Ting Lim $4,065.74 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The tenant failed to attend today’s hearing.
The landlord applied to terminate the tenancy in October 2023 and this was granted. Rent arrears are now with a debt collection agency. This application is for compensation in relation to the high levels of Meth contamination 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. The tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The tenant did not return the keys.
The amounts ordered are 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 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:
The meth testing showed a high level of meth contamination, as a result the damage was to the floorings, drapes and associated damages with the clean up. The landlord is seeking the excess for the insurance that will cover the damages in excess of $9000.00.
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.
Inspire Property Management Limited As Agent For Chong Dee Koo Lydia Shuck Ting Lim claims the tenant has used the premises unlawfully, by using or allowing others to use illegal drugs in the home.
A tenant must not use the premises or permit the premises to be used for an unlawful purpose. See section 40(2)(b) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $1,800.00. See section 40(3A)(c) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
At the commencement of the tenancy there was a clear test. At the conclusion of the tenancy the levels of Methamphetamine detected were very high. On the evidence before me I find that the tenant has committed an unlawful act.
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. See section 109(3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The issues associated with Methamphetamine is well publicised. There must be an award of damages accordingly.
Because Inspire Property Management Limited As Agent For Chong Dee Koo Lydia Shuck Ting Lim has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4793057 — Property damage at 88 Lothian Crescent, Strathern, Invercargill 9812

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4793057 — Property damage at 88 Lothian Crescent, Strathern, Invercargill 9812

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

Property management

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions