What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4852645?

The tribunal order states: Hai Nguyen and Hau Nguyen must pay Rental Hq Limited Acting Agent For Neil

How much money was awarded in case 4852645?

Cleaning: $371.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,800.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Per Week For Reduced Rent Negotiated…: $9,860.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $350.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $700.00 awarded to landlord; Heated Towel Rail: $150.00 awarded to landlord; Holes in rimu flooring in wardrobes,…: $5,000.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $943.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $146.56 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4852645?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4852645?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10882803-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4852645?

The tribunal order states: Hai Nguyen and Hau Nguyen must pay Rental Hq Limited Acting Agent For Neil

How much money was awarded in case 4852645?

Cleaning: $371.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,800.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Per Week For Reduced Rent Negotiated…: $9,860.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $350.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $700.00 awarded to landlord; Heated Towel Rail: $150.00 awarded to landlord; Holes in rimu flooring in wardrobes,…: $5,000.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $943.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $146.56 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4852645?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4852645?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10882803-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

829 Te Atatu Road, Te Atatu Peninsula, Auckland 0610 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4852645 — Property damage

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4852645 — net $16,461.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
per week for reduced rent negotiated with new tenants until end of fixed term on 4 August 2024	$9,860.00	per week for reduced rent negotiated with new tenants until end of fixed term on 4 August 2024
Water rates: (17/11/23 to 18/3/24	$146.56	Water rates: (17/11/23 to 18/3/24
Repairs: Holes in rimu flooring in wardrobes, cupboards and lounge	$5,000.00	Repairs: Holes in rimu flooring in wardrobes, cupboards and lounge
Repairs: Fascia trim replacement	$700.00	Repairs: Fascia trim replacement
Repairs: Heated towel rail	$150.00	Repairs: Heated towel rail
Cleaning house, lawns and rubbish removal	$943.00	Cleaning house, lawns and rubbish removal
Lock/key replacement	$350.00	Lock/key replacement
Carpet Cleaning	$371.00	Carpet Cleaning
Exemplary damages- s40(3A)(c) of the RTA	$1,800.00	s40(3A)(c) of the RTA
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$16,461.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$16,461.00

Order

Hai Nguyen and Hau Nguyen must pay Rental Hq Limited Acting Agent For Neil Vernon For The Vernon Family Trust $16,461.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,880.00 (5446317-006) to Rental Hq Limited Acting Agent For Neil Vernon For The Vernon Family Trust immediately.

Reasons

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

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

The tenancy was for a fixed term commencing 31 July 2023 and due to end on 4 August 2024.
On 14 February 2024, during a property inspection, the landlord found evidence of illicit drug growing at the premise and reported this to the New Zealand Police. The landlord later discovered, on 14 March 2024, the tenants had abandoned the property, taking their belongings with them.
The tenants drug growing operation has resulted in considerable damage to the premise and has delayed the landlord finding new tenants for the property while remediation work has been completed.
The landlord found new tenants, who moved into the property on 17 May 2024. However, the tenants would only take the property at a reduced rental rate of $700.00 per week, $20.00 less per week than the tenants were paying. This rent reduction for the period 17 May 2024 to 4 August 2024 has been passed on to the tenants as a cost of breaking the fixed term lease early and damaging the premise to the degree that it was difficult for the landlord to attract new tenants at the same rental rate.
The tenancy ended on 16 May 2024, with tenant liability for the rent rebate given to the new tenants from 17 May 2024 to 4 August 2024.
The tenants had not paid their water rates invoices from 17 November 2023 to 18 March 2024
The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amount owing at 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 tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The lawns were not mown, rubbish was left behind that needed to be disposed of and the carpet was stained by fertiliser and required commercial cleaning.
The tenants 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: a. The rimu parquet flooring was severely damaged throughout the house with holes drilled through it in the wardrobes, cupboards and lounge; b. The fascia trim was damaged throughout the house; and c. The heated towel rail required replacement.
The damage was intentional as it was caused through the tenants engaging in an illegal drug growing operation in the house and shed. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenants have not disproved liability for the damage they caused during the tenancy.
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. Unlawful use of the premise
Rental Hq Limited Acting Agent For Neil Vernon For The Vernon Family Trust claims the tenant has used the premises unlawfully, by growing illicit drugs in the house and shed, as confirmed by a New Zealand Police report provided in evidence in conjunction with photographs taken at the property inspection on 14 February 2024.
The landlord says the Police are aware of the tenants being part of a drug growing ring and have also confirmed the identification the tenants provided to the landlord has been unlawfully varied from the original passport documents provided to the tenants by their country of origin.
The landlord also confirmed the tenants neighbours confirmed to it they could see, and had photographed the tenants use of several bright halogen lights at night in the shed, presumably to encourage maximum growth of the cannabis plants they were growing in the shed, and that two days prior to any property inspection carried out by the landlord, the neighbours noticed vans coming to remove items from the premise and returning these items after the property inspections had been completed.
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.
I am satisfied that the tenants have breached their obligations under the tenancy agreement and the RTA by cultivating and distributing a class C drug (cannabis) at/from the premise and that the tenants have also breached sections 7(1)(a) and (b) and 9 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975, by cultivating cannabis at the rental premises and possessing/ supplying this Class C controlled drug to other persons from the premise.
Section 40(2)(c) of the RTA requires the tenants not to “use the premises, or permit the premises to be used, for any unlawful purpose”. Growing and distributing cannabis at the premises is using the rental premises for an unlawful purpose.
I find the tenants have 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.
I am satisfied it would be just to require the tenants to pay a sum in exemplary damages because: a. The tenants intentionally used the premise for illegal purposes and took steps to actively deceived the landlord by taking measures to cover up the unlawful activity whenever the landlord inspected the premise; b. the landlord should have been able to rely on the tenants not to use the premise for unlawful purposes and to to meet their obligations under the tenancy agreement, the RTA and other relevant statutes; c. It is in the interests of the landlord to receive exemplary damages for the stress and inconvenience caused by the tenants’ unlawful use of the premise; and d. It is in the public interest for tenant’s to be penalised as a disincentive to breaching their obligations not to use a rental premise to grow and distribute a class C drug in breach of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975.
The tenants intent was one of disregard of their obligations under s40(2)(b) of the RTA not to use the premise for an unlawful purpose, and public interest favours an award of the maximum amount of exemplary damages available to the Tribunal to award in order to punish and deter such conduct. Reimbursement of filing fee
Because Rental Hq Limited Acting Agent For Neil Vernon For The Vernon Family Trust has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4852645 — net $16,461.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
per week for reduced rent negotiated with new tenants until end of fixed term on 4 August 2024	$9,860.00	per week for reduced rent negotiated with new tenants until end of fixed term on 4 August 2024
Water rates: (17/11/23 to 18/3/24	$146.56	Water rates: (17/11/23 to 18/3/24
Repairs: Holes in rimu flooring in wardrobes, cupboards and lounge	$5,000.00	Repairs: Holes in rimu flooring in wardrobes, cupboards and lounge
Repairs: Fascia trim replacement	$700.00	Repairs: Fascia trim replacement
Repairs: Heated towel rail	$150.00	Repairs: Heated towel rail
Cleaning house, lawns and rubbish removal	$943.00	Cleaning house, lawns and rubbish removal
Lock/key replacement	$350.00	Lock/key replacement
Carpet Cleaning	$371.00	Carpet Cleaning
Exemplary damages- s40(3A)(c) of the RTA	$1,800.00	s40(3A)(c) of the RTA
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$16,461.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$16,461.00

Order

Hai Nguyen and Hau Nguyen must pay Rental Hq Limited Acting Agent For Neil Vernon For The Vernon Family Trust $16,461.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,880.00 (5446317-006) to Rental Hq Limited Acting Agent For Neil Vernon For The Vernon Family Trust immediately.

Reasons

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

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

The tenancy was for a fixed term commencing 31 July 2023 and due to end on 4 August 2024.
On 14 February 2024, during a property inspection, the landlord found evidence of illicit drug growing at the premise and reported this to the New Zealand Police. The landlord later discovered, on 14 March 2024, the tenants had abandoned the property, taking their belongings with them.
The tenants drug growing operation has resulted in considerable damage to the premise and has delayed the landlord finding new tenants for the property while remediation work has been completed.
The landlord found new tenants, who moved into the property on 17 May 2024. However, the tenants would only take the property at a reduced rental rate of $700.00 per week, $20.00 less per week than the tenants were paying. This rent reduction for the period 17 May 2024 to 4 August 2024 has been passed on to the tenants as a cost of breaking the fixed term lease early and damaging the premise to the degree that it was difficult for the landlord to attract new tenants at the same rental rate.
The tenancy ended on 16 May 2024, with tenant liability for the rent rebate given to the new tenants from 17 May 2024 to 4 August 2024.
The tenants had not paid their water rates invoices from 17 November 2023 to 18 March 2024
The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amount owing at 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 tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The lawns were not mown, rubbish was left behind that needed to be disposed of and the carpet was stained by fertiliser and required commercial cleaning.
The tenants 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: a. The rimu parquet flooring was severely damaged throughout the house with holes drilled through it in the wardrobes, cupboards and lounge; b. The fascia trim was damaged throughout the house; and c. The heated towel rail required replacement.
The damage was intentional as it was caused through the tenants engaging in an illegal drug growing operation in the house and shed. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenants have not disproved liability for the damage they caused during the tenancy.
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. Unlawful use of the premise
Rental Hq Limited Acting Agent For Neil Vernon For The Vernon Family Trust claims the tenant has used the premises unlawfully, by growing illicit drugs in the house and shed, as confirmed by a New Zealand Police report provided in evidence in conjunction with photographs taken at the property inspection on 14 February 2024.
The landlord says the Police are aware of the tenants being part of a drug growing ring and have also confirmed the identification the tenants provided to the landlord has been unlawfully varied from the original passport documents provided to the tenants by their country of origin.
The landlord also confirmed the tenants neighbours confirmed to it they could see, and had photographed the tenants use of several bright halogen lights at night in the shed, presumably to encourage maximum growth of the cannabis plants they were growing in the shed, and that two days prior to any property inspection carried out by the landlord, the neighbours noticed vans coming to remove items from the premise and returning these items after the property inspections had been completed.
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.
I am satisfied that the tenants have breached their obligations under the tenancy agreement and the RTA by cultivating and distributing a class C drug (cannabis) at/from the premise and that the tenants have also breached sections 7(1)(a) and (b) and 9 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975, by cultivating cannabis at the rental premises and possessing/ supplying this Class C controlled drug to other persons from the premise.
Section 40(2)(c) of the RTA requires the tenants not to “use the premises, or permit the premises to be used, for any unlawful purpose”. Growing and distributing cannabis at the premises is using the rental premises for an unlawful purpose.
I find the tenants have 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.
I am satisfied it would be just to require the tenants to pay a sum in exemplary damages because: a. The tenants intentionally used the premise for illegal purposes and took steps to actively deceived the landlord by taking measures to cover up the unlawful activity whenever the landlord inspected the premise; b. the landlord should have been able to rely on the tenants not to use the premise for unlawful purposes and to to meet their obligations under the tenancy agreement, the RTA and other relevant statutes; c. It is in the interests of the landlord to receive exemplary damages for the stress and inconvenience caused by the tenants’ unlawful use of the premise; and d. It is in the public interest for tenant’s to be penalised as a disincentive to breaching their obligations not to use a rental premise to grow and distribute a class C drug in breach of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975.
The tenants intent was one of disregard of their obligations under s40(2)(b) of the RTA not to use the premise for an unlawful purpose, and public interest favours an award of the maximum amount of exemplary damages available to the Tribunal to award in order to punish and deter such conduct. Reimbursement of filing fee
Because Rental Hq Limited Acting Agent For Neil Vernon For The Vernon Family Trust has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4852645 — Property damage at 829 Te Atatu Road, Te Atatu Peninsula, Auckland 0610

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4852645 — Property damage at 829 Te Atatu Road, Te Atatu Peninsula, Auckland 0610

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

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

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

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