What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4905414?

The tribunal order states: Maata Awhina Rawiri must pay David Gregory Moore $2,670.44 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 4905414?

Cleaning: $360.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,640.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Carpet: $650.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4905414?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4905414?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10874519-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4905414?

The tribunal order states: Maata Awhina Rawiri must pay David Gregory Moore $2,670.44 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 4905414?

Cleaning: $360.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,640.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Carpet: $650.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4905414?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4905414?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10874519-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Room 6, 8 St Hill Street, Whanganui, Whanganui 4500 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4905414 — Rent arrears

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4905414 — net $2,670.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$1,640.00	Rent arrears
Cleaning	$360.00	Cleaning
Replace furnishings: carpet	$650.00	Replace furnishings: carpet
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,670.44
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,670.44

The landlord attended the hearing. There was no appearance by the tenant.

On 3 July 2024 there was a phone hearing to determine jurisdiction for this claim and another for this tenant’s son. I recorded that although the tenancy agreement is in the form of a Flat-sharing agreement, the landlord did not actually live at the premises. He and his wife own the property and rent was to be paid to them, not to a “head tenant” as indicated in the agreement.

The room rented was part of an apartment which had 5 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms and 1 kitchen. There is another apartment at the premises, which is rented in its entirety to a tenant. The third apartment is under renovation.

I recorded that subject to any different evidence that the tenant may give, it appeared that the Tribunal has jurisdiction to deal with this claim.

I was not satisfied that the tenant had received notice of the hearing.

Directions were made for service and the hearing adjourned.

At a hearing on 31 July 2024 it transpired that the landlord had not complied with the directions. He was given a further opportunity to do so.

Today I am satisfied that the landlord has emailed the tenant setting out the claims he is making with some supporting evidence.

The tenant did not appear and so based on the evidence the landlord previously gave about the nature of the rental, I am satisfied that I have jurisdiction to consider his claims.

The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 24 May 2024. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy was $1640.

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 and remove all rubbish. The tenant did not do so.

The tenant had left a cat and kittens at the premises. There was cat excrement throughout the room and on the deck. It was extensive.

The landlord has claimed $360 for removal of cat faeces outside, washing, scrubbing and disinfecting the deck. The amount ordered is proved.

The carpet had to be removed. The photos show, in between the piles of cat faeces, that the carpet had been in good condition at the start of the tenancy.

The landlord brought a large rug from home to put in the room so that he could rent it out immediately. That originally cost $1580 and he would like to retrieve it. He seeks $650 for replacement carpet.

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.

I find that the damage to the carpet was intentional, in that, it was inevitable that a cat and kittens left in a room will soil the floor. The carpet had to be replaced and the amount sought is reasonable.

The amounts ordered are proved.

Because David Gregory Moore has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4905414 — net $2,670.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$1,640.00	Rent arrears
Cleaning	$360.00	Cleaning
Replace furnishings: carpet	$650.00	Replace furnishings: carpet
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,670.44
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,670.44

Order

Maata Awhina Rawiri must pay David Gregory Moore $2,670.44 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. There was no appearance by the tenant.
On 3 July 2024 there was a phone hearing to determine jurisdiction for this claim and another for this tenant’s son. I recorded that although the tenancy agreement is in the form of a Flat-sharing agreement, the landlord did not actually live at the premises. He and his wife own the property and rent was to be paid to them, not to a “head tenant” as indicated in the agreement.
The room rented was part of an apartment which had 5 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms and 1 kitchen. There is another apartment at the premises, which is rented in its entirety to a tenant. The third apartment is under renovation.
I recorded that subject to any different evidence that the tenant may give, it appeared that the Tribunal has jurisdiction to deal with this claim.
I was not satisfied that the tenant had received notice of the hearing.
Directions were made for service and the hearing adjourned.
At a hearing on 31 July 2024 it transpired that the landlord had not complied with the directions. He was given a further opportunity to do so.
Today I am satisfied that the landlord has emailed the tenant setting out the claims he is making with some supporting evidence.
The tenant did not appear and so based on the evidence the landlord previously gave about the nature of the rental, I am satisfied that I have jurisdiction to consider his claims.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 24 May 2024. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy was $1640.

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 and remove all rubbish. The tenant did not do so.
The tenant had left a cat and kittens at the premises. There was cat excrement throughout the room and on the deck. It was extensive.
The landlord has claimed $360 for removal of cat faeces outside, washing, scrubbing and disinfecting the deck. The amount ordered is proved.
The carpet had to be removed. The photos show, in between the piles of cat faeces, that the carpet had been in good condition at the start of the tenancy.
The landlord brought a large rug from home to put in the room so that he could rent it out immediately. That originally cost $1580 and he would like to retrieve it. He seeks $650 for replacement carpet.
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.
I find that the damage to the carpet was intentional, in that, it was inevitable that a cat and kittens left in a room will soil the floor. The carpet had to be replaced and the amount sought is reasonable.
The amounts ordered are proved.
Because David Gregory Moore has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4905414 — Rent arrears at Room 6, 8 St Hill Street, Whanganui, Whanganui 4500

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4905414 — Rent arrears at Room 6, 8 St Hill Street, Whanganui, 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?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

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?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions