What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4891360?

The tribunal order states: Tracey Lorigan to pay Wolfbrook Property Management Limited As Agent For

How much money was awarded in case 4891360?

Cleaning: $600.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Carpet: $782.46 awarded to landlord; Painting: $402.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4891360?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4891360?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10770164-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4891360?

The tribunal order states: Tracey Lorigan to pay Wolfbrook Property Management Limited As Agent For

How much money was awarded in case 4891360?

Cleaning: $600.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Carpet: $782.46 awarded to landlord; Painting: $402.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4891360?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4891360?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10770164-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 10, 10 Browning Street, Sydenham, Christchurch Tenancy Tribunal Case 4891360 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Unit/Flat 10, 10 Browning Street, Sydenham, Christchurch Tenancy Tribunal Case 4891360 — Property damage | 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 4891360 — net $1,805.40 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning	$600.00	Cleaning
Repairs: Painting	$402.50	Repairs: Painting
Repairs: Carpet	$782.46	Repairs: Carpet
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,805.40
Bond	$1,860.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,805.40

Claims and awards for application 4891360 — net $1,805.40 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Cleaning

Amount: $600.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning

Repairs: Painting

Amount: $402.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Painting

Repairs: Carpet

Amount: $782.46
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Carpet

Filing fee reimbursement

Amount: $20.44
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Filing fee reimbursement

Net award

Landlord $1,805.40

Bond

Landlord $1,860.00

Total payable by Tenant to Landlord

Landlord $1,805.40

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Filing Fee Property damage

Order

Tracey Lorigan to pay Wolfbrook Property Management Limited As Agent For Chathnra Sampath $1,805.40 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,860.00 (6461066-007) immediately apportioned as follows: Wolfbrook Property Management Limited As Agent For Chathnra Sampath: $1,805.40 Tracey Lorigan: $54.60
Ms Lorigan’s application is dismissed.

Reasons

I heard the landlord’s application on 3 July 2024. Both parties attended that hearing.
The landlord had applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The tenant made a cross-application a few days before the 3 July hearing. The cross application had not been assessed or served on the landlord before the 3 July hearing. Ms Lorigan advised that there was overlap between the two claims. As such, I adjourned the hearing on 3 July so that all matters could be considered together.
The hearing was rescheduled for today. Ms Lorigan did not attend and did not apply for an adjournment. Her claims are dismissed.

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 did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy. The landlord provided photographs and a invoice to support its claim.
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.
The following damage was caused during the tenancy: carpet damage on the stairs and wall/paint damage. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord provided ingoing and outgoing photographs and invoices for repair costs. The amounts ordered are proved.
For completeness, I record that Ms Lorigan had disputed the carpet damage, suggesting that it was caused by workmanship leading to carpet coming away from the stairs and then fraying after a fall by a child. The landlord provided evidence from a carpet supplier whose opinion that the damage was more consistent with pet damage. Based on the photographic evidence, that explanation seems far more likely. I find Ms Lorigan liable for the carpet damage.
As the landlord was the successful party, I have awarded reimbursement of the Tribunal application 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 4891360 — net $1,805.40 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning	$600.00	Cleaning
Repairs: Painting	$402.50	Repairs: Painting
Repairs: Carpet	$782.46	Repairs: Carpet
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,805.40
Bond	$1,860.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,805.40

Claims and awards for application 4891360 — net $1,805.40 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Cleaning

Amount: $600.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning

Repairs: Painting

Amount: $402.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Painting

Repairs: Carpet

Amount: $782.46
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Carpet

Filing fee reimbursement

Amount: $20.44
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Filing fee reimbursement

Net award

Landlord $1,805.40

Bond

Landlord $1,860.00

Total payable by Tenant to Landlord

Landlord $1,805.40

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Filing Fee Property damage

Order

Tracey Lorigan to pay Wolfbrook Property Management Limited As Agent For Chathnra Sampath $1,805.40 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,860.00 (6461066-007) immediately apportioned as follows: Wolfbrook Property Management Limited As Agent For Chathnra Sampath: $1,805.40 Tracey Lorigan: $54.60
Ms Lorigan’s application is dismissed.

Reasons

I heard the landlord’s application on 3 July 2024. Both parties attended that hearing.
The landlord had applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The tenant made a cross-application a few days before the 3 July hearing. The cross application had not been assessed or served on the landlord before the 3 July hearing. Ms Lorigan advised that there was overlap between the two claims. As such, I adjourned the hearing on 3 July so that all matters could be considered together.
The hearing was rescheduled for today. Ms Lorigan did not attend and did not apply for an adjournment. Her claims are dismissed.

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 did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy. The landlord provided photographs and a invoice to support its claim.
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.
The following damage was caused during the tenancy: carpet damage on the stairs and wall/paint damage. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord provided ingoing and outgoing photographs and invoices for repair costs. The amounts ordered are proved.
For completeness, I record that Ms Lorigan had disputed the carpet damage, suggesting that it was caused by workmanship leading to carpet coming away from the stairs and then fraying after a fall by a child. The landlord provided evidence from a carpet supplier whose opinion that the damage was more consistent with pet damage. Based on the photographic evidence, that explanation seems far more likely. I find Ms Lorigan liable for the carpet damage.
As the landlord was the successful party, I have awarded reimbursement of the Tribunal application fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4891360 — Property damage at Unit/Flat 10, 10 Browning Street, Sydenham, Christchurch

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4891360 — Property damage at Unit/Flat 10, 10 Browning Street, Sydenham, Christchurch

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