What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4808142?

The tribunal order states: Isabel Bewley is to pay Precision Property Management Limited $529.44

How much money was awarded in case 4808142?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $409.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $100.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4808142?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4808142?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10111294-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4808142?

The tribunal order states: Isabel Bewley is to pay Precision Property Management Limited $529.44

How much money was awarded in case 4808142?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $409.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $100.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4808142?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4808142?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10111294-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

20B Logan Street, Fairy Springs, Rotorua 3015 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4808142 — Property damage

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4808142. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Replacement Rangehood	$409.00	Replacement Rangehood
Replacement Tile	$100.00	Replacement Tile
Filing Fee	$20.44	Filing Fee

Order

Isabel Bewley is to pay Precision Property Management Limited $529.44 immediately, calculated as follows: DescriptionLandlord Replacement Rangehood$409.00 Replacement Tile$100.00 Filing Fee$20.44 Total award$529.44

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The Landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the tenant’s obligations.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

The Tribunal may terminate a tenancy for breach where, due to the nature or extent of the breach, it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate. See section 56(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Where the breach is capable of remedy the landlord must first serve a notice on the tenant requiring them to remedy the breach within at least 14 days and establish that the tenant has failed to do so.
The Landlord claims the Tenant has breached their obligations by causing or allowing damage to the premises and not keeping the premises reasonably clean and tidy.
The landlord served a 14-day notice on the tenant, stating that the tenant was breaching her obligations as follows: a. Damaging the rangehood, which requires repair by an approved electrician. b. Two cars on the front lawn need removing; they are not on the tenancy agreement and are seemingly inoperative. c. A broken tile in the kitchen that needs replacing. d. Lawns are not maintained to standard, with edges and lawns needing attention and lawn clippings to be removed. e. Multiple stains on the carpets which were not there initially, requiring professional cleaning. f. Wax needs to be removed from the wall and carpet gently. g. General rubbish around the house and off the deck needs to be cleared. h. The door on the garden shed needs to be rehung on its hinges. i. A broken board on the deck surround that needs repairing.
The Tenant acknowledges her son pulled the rangehood away from the wall and there have been stains on the carpet, requiring professional cleaning.
Overall, the Landlord is worried about the gradual degradation of the property and feels its conditions has worsened since the tenancy began. The Landlord considers the Tenant is unable to comply with her obligations going forward.
In most cases there is insufficient evidence to establish the various breaches, but the Tenant has acknowledged it has been a struggle to keep on top of things. It is challenging with young children, and it is not always possible to watch them all of the time.
Still, there is a need for the Tenant to take care of the premises. Renting, does not absolve a person from looking after the place where they live, as if it was their own.
The Landlord has agreed for the tenancy to continue but hopes the application will serve as a warning to the Tenant, that the Landlord, while patient and forbearing, will seek to terminate the tenancy if the damage, untidiness and uncleanness continues.

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. The rangehood has been pulled away from the wall by the Tenant’s son and has become irreparably damaged when it has not been refixed to the wall correctly and safely by the Tenant. I consider the damage more than fair wear and tear. I consider the Landlord should have investigated the rangehood despite the Tenant saying they had fixed the problem. The Landlord also paid for an electrician to install the rangehood. I discussed with the parties, and they agreed my suggestion the Tenant should have to pay the full costs of the replacement rangehood if it did not have to contribute to the electrician’s fees. I award $409 to the Landlord. b. A tile was damaged during the Tenancy. The Tenant does not know how the tile was cracked. The cost of replacing the tile was $250.00. No invoice has been provided with the Landlord’s application to support its claim. I award $100.00 for the replacement of the tile, as I consider this amount to be reasonable, in the absence of any invoice.
Because the Landlord has substantially succeeded with it claims, the Tenant must reimburse the Landlord’s application filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4808142. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Replacement Rangehood	$409.00	Replacement Rangehood
Replacement Tile	$100.00	Replacement Tile
Filing Fee	$20.44	Filing Fee

Order

Isabel Bewley is to pay Precision Property Management Limited $529.44 immediately, calculated as follows: DescriptionLandlord Replacement Rangehood$409.00 Replacement Tile$100.00 Filing Fee$20.44 Total award$529.44

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The Landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the tenant’s obligations.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

The Tribunal may terminate a tenancy for breach where, due to the nature or extent of the breach, it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate. See section 56(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Where the breach is capable of remedy the landlord must first serve a notice on the tenant requiring them to remedy the breach within at least 14 days and establish that the tenant has failed to do so.
The Landlord claims the Tenant has breached their obligations by causing or allowing damage to the premises and not keeping the premises reasonably clean and tidy.
The landlord served a 14-day notice on the tenant, stating that the tenant was breaching her obligations as follows: a. Damaging the rangehood, which requires repair by an approved electrician. b. Two cars on the front lawn need removing; they are not on the tenancy agreement and are seemingly inoperative. c. A broken tile in the kitchen that needs replacing. d. Lawns are not maintained to standard, with edges and lawns needing attention and lawn clippings to be removed. e. Multiple stains on the carpets which were not there initially, requiring professional cleaning. f. Wax needs to be removed from the wall and carpet gently. g. General rubbish around the house and off the deck needs to be cleared. h. The door on the garden shed needs to be rehung on its hinges. i. A broken board on the deck surround that needs repairing.
The Tenant acknowledges her son pulled the rangehood away from the wall and there have been stains on the carpet, requiring professional cleaning.
Overall, the Landlord is worried about the gradual degradation of the property and feels its conditions has worsened since the tenancy began. The Landlord considers the Tenant is unable to comply with her obligations going forward.
In most cases there is insufficient evidence to establish the various breaches, but the Tenant has acknowledged it has been a struggle to keep on top of things. It is challenging with young children, and it is not always possible to watch them all of the time.
Still, there is a need for the Tenant to take care of the premises. Renting, does not absolve a person from looking after the place where they live, as if it was their own.
The Landlord has agreed for the tenancy to continue but hopes the application will serve as a warning to the Tenant, that the Landlord, while patient and forbearing, will seek to terminate the tenancy if the damage, untidiness and uncleanness continues.

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. The rangehood has been pulled away from the wall by the Tenant’s son and has become irreparably damaged when it has not been refixed to the wall correctly and safely by the Tenant. I consider the damage more than fair wear and tear. I consider the Landlord should have investigated the rangehood despite the Tenant saying they had fixed the problem. The Landlord also paid for an electrician to install the rangehood. I discussed with the parties, and they agreed my suggestion the Tenant should have to pay the full costs of the replacement rangehood if it did not have to contribute to the electrician’s fees. I award $409 to the Landlord. b. A tile was damaged during the Tenancy. The Tenant does not know how the tile was cracked. The cost of replacing the tile was $250.00. No invoice has been provided with the Landlord’s application to support its claim. I award $100.00 for the replacement of the tile, as I consider this amount to be reasonable, in the absence of any invoice.
Because the Landlord has substantially succeeded with it claims, the Tenant must reimburse the Landlord’s application filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4808142 — Property damage at 20B Logan Street, Fairy Springs, Rotorua 3015

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4808142 — Property damage at 20B Logan Street, Fairy Springs, Rotorua 3015

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

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

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions