What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4890740?

The tribunal order states: Stefan Floeter must pay Bartley Real Estate Limited As Agent For Paula

How much money was awarded in case 4890740?

Cleaning: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $450.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,620.00 awarded to landlord; Sliding Door: $322.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Bedframe: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $250.00 awarded to landlord; Smoke Alarms: $49.71 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4890740?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness, Property damage, Smoke alarms.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4890740?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10542576-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4890740?

The tribunal order states: Stefan Floeter must pay Bartley Real Estate Limited As Agent For Paula

How much money was awarded in case 4890740?

Cleaning: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $450.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,620.00 awarded to landlord; Sliding Door: $322.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Bedframe: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $250.00 awarded to landlord; Smoke Alarms: $49.71 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4890740?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness, Property damage, Smoke alarms.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4890740?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10542576-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat A, 43 Seafront, Whanganui 4500 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4890740 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Unit/Flat A, 43 Seafront, Whanganui 4500 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4890740 — Rent arrears | TenantCheck

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4890740 — net $1,472.15 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$1,620.00	Rent arrears
Carpet Cleaning	$200.00	Carpet Cleaning
Cleaning	$450.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$250.00	Rubbish removal
Replace furnishings: bedframe	$200.00	Replace furnishings: bedframe
Replace smoke alarms	$49.71	Replace smoke alarms
Repairs: sliding door	$322.00	Repairs: sliding door
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,472.15
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,472.15

Claims and awards for application 4890740 — net $1,472.15 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears

Amount: $1,620.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears

Carpet Cleaning

Amount: $200.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Carpet Cleaning

Cleaning

Amount: $450.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning

Rubbish removal

Amount: $250.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal

Replace furnishings: bedframe

Amount: $200.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Replace furnishings: bedframe

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Carpet Cleaning Cleanliness Filing Fee Rent arrears Property damage Rubbish Removal Replace Smoke Alarms

Order

Stefan Floeter must pay Bartley Real Estate Limited As Agent For Paula Jackson $1,472.15 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,640.00 (6520669-001) to Bartley Real Estate Limited As Agent For Paula Jackson immediately.
The tenant’s application is dismissed. DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears$1,620.00 Carpet Cleaning$200.00 Cleaning$450.00 Rubbish removal$250.00 Replace furnishings: bedframe$200.00 Replace smoke alarms$49.71 Repairs: sliding door$322.00 Filing fee reimbursement$20.44 Total award$3,112.15 Bond$1,640.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$1,472.15

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing.
The tenant did not attend the hearing at the scheduled time, request an adjournment, or notify the Tribunal the matter has settled. See sections 78(1)(i) and 92(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
There was no information in the tenant’s application which could support a claim and the tenant has failed to appear. The tenant’s application is therefore dismissed.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The landlord gave evidence that the tenancy ended on 20 June 2024 when the tenant handed back possession to the landlord and returned the keys. The landlord provided rent records 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 and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord provided photographic evidence tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish.
The following chattels were missing at the end of the tenancy: two smoke alarms and a bedframe.
The amounts ordered are proved. The amounts awarded are based on charges which the Tribunal regularly sees for such works in this area.

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.
The landlord claimed that the following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. A sliding door was taken off its runner which was damaged. b. There was fire damage to the ceiling. c. Wall panels were scratched. d. The cooktop, the fridge and a cupboard were damaged.
It is for an applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove their claims. If the applicant fails to do so then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not, because it is for the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not the Tribunal’s responsibility to extract evidence.
The landlord has not produced evidence of the damage to the wall panels, the cooktop, the fridge and the cupboard. Nor has the landlord produced evidence of the amount she has suffered in loss. These claims are not proven on the balance of probabilities and are dismissed.
The damage to the sliding door and to the ceiling is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The damage is intentional. The landlord has produced an invoice for the cost of the repair of the sliding door and this amount is proven.
The landlord has not given any indication of how the amount she has claimed for the fire damage to the ceiling has been quantified, nor has she provided clear photographs indicating the extent of the damage or what is required to repair it. The damage has not been fixed and so the landlord has not suffered any loss. The landlord has not persuaded the Tribunal on the balance of probabilities that she has suffered loss from the ceiling damage. The landlord’s claim is dismissed.
Because Bartley Real Estate Limited As Agent For Paula Jackson has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4890740 — net $1,472.15 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$1,620.00	Rent arrears
Carpet Cleaning	$200.00	Carpet Cleaning
Cleaning	$450.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$250.00	Rubbish removal
Replace furnishings: bedframe	$200.00	Replace furnishings: bedframe
Replace smoke alarms	$49.71	Replace smoke alarms
Repairs: sliding door	$322.00	Repairs: sliding door
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,472.15
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,472.15

Claims and awards for application 4890740 — net $1,472.15 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears

Amount: $1,620.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears

Carpet Cleaning

Amount: $200.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Carpet Cleaning

Cleaning

Amount: $450.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning

Rubbish removal

Amount: $250.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal

Replace furnishings: bedframe

Amount: $200.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Replace furnishings: bedframe

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Carpet Cleaning Cleanliness Filing Fee Rent arrears Property damage Rubbish Removal Replace Smoke Alarms

Order

Stefan Floeter must pay Bartley Real Estate Limited As Agent For Paula Jackson $1,472.15 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,640.00 (6520669-001) to Bartley Real Estate Limited As Agent For Paula Jackson immediately.
The tenant’s application is dismissed. DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears$1,620.00 Carpet Cleaning$200.00 Cleaning$450.00 Rubbish removal$250.00 Replace furnishings: bedframe$200.00 Replace smoke alarms$49.71 Repairs: sliding door$322.00 Filing fee reimbursement$20.44 Total award$3,112.15 Bond$1,640.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$1,472.15

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing.
The tenant did not attend the hearing at the scheduled time, request an adjournment, or notify the Tribunal the matter has settled. See sections 78(1)(i) and 92(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
There was no information in the tenant’s application which could support a claim and the tenant has failed to appear. The tenant’s application is therefore dismissed.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The landlord gave evidence that the tenancy ended on 20 June 2024 when the tenant handed back possession to the landlord and returned the keys. The landlord provided rent records 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 and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord provided photographic evidence tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish.
The following chattels were missing at the end of the tenancy: two smoke alarms and a bedframe.
The amounts ordered are proved. The amounts awarded are based on charges which the Tribunal regularly sees for such works in this area.

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.
The landlord claimed that the following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. A sliding door was taken off its runner which was damaged. b. There was fire damage to the ceiling. c. Wall panels were scratched. d. The cooktop, the fridge and a cupboard were damaged.
It is for an applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove their claims. If the applicant fails to do so then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not, because it is for the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not the Tribunal’s responsibility to extract evidence.
The landlord has not produced evidence of the damage to the wall panels, the cooktop, the fridge and the cupboard. Nor has the landlord produced evidence of the amount she has suffered in loss. These claims are not proven on the balance of probabilities and are dismissed.
The damage to the sliding door and to the ceiling is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The damage is intentional. The landlord has produced an invoice for the cost of the repair of the sliding door and this amount is proven.
The landlord has not given any indication of how the amount she has claimed for the fire damage to the ceiling has been quantified, nor has she provided clear photographs indicating the extent of the damage or what is required to repair it. The damage has not been fixed and so the landlord has not suffered any loss. The landlord has not persuaded the Tribunal on the balance of probabilities that she has suffered loss from the ceiling damage. The landlord’s claim is dismissed.
Because Bartley Real Estate Limited As Agent For Paula Jackson has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4890740 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat A, 43 Seafront, Whanganui 4500

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4890740 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat A, 43 Seafront, Whanganui 4500

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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?

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