What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4917054?

The tribunal order states: Cogan Young and Taryn Young must pay Red Hot Real Estate Limited As

How much money was awarded in case 4917054?

Cleaning: $208.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $300.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,678.57 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,830.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $618.04 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4917054?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4917054?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10735578-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4917054?

The tribunal order states: Cogan Young and Taryn Young must pay Red Hot Real Estate Limited As

How much money was awarded in case 4917054?

Cleaning: $208.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $300.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,678.57 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,830.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $618.04 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4917054?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4917054?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10735578-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

58 Rothesay Road, Parklands, Christchurch 8083 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4917054 — Property damage

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4917054 — net $4,655.05 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$2,678.57	Rent arrears
Water rates	$618.04	Water rates
Cleaning	$208.00	Cleaning
Lawns and Garden work	$300.00	Lawns and Garden work
Repairs: Insurance excess - carpet damage	$1,000.00	Repairs: Insurance excess - carpet damage
Repairs: Wall damage and paint repairs	$1,830.00	Repairs: Wall damage and paint repairs
Rubbish removal	$200.00	Rubbish removal
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$4,655.05
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,655.05

Cogan Young and Taryn Young must pay Red Hot Real Estate Limited As Agent For Jill And Howard Smith $4,655.05 immediately, calculated as shown in table below. DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears$2,678.57 Water rates$618.04 Cleaning$208.00 Lawns and Garden work$300.00 Repairs: Insurance excess - carpet damage$1,000.00 Repairs: Wall damage and paint repairs$1,830.00 Rubbish removal$200.00 Filing fee reimbursement$20.44 Total award$6,855.05 Bond$2,200.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$4,655.05

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,200.00 (5433960-002) to Red Hot Real Estate Limited As Agent For Jill And Howard Smith immediately.

The landlord’s claim for a window repair is dismissed.

Reasons

A representative of the landlord attended the hearing. The tenants did not attend.

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 and water rates?

The tenancy ended on 27 May 2024. The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amounts 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 did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.

The landlord provided photographs and invoices for costs incurred. The cleaning costs were established.

The landlord claimed $598.00 for exterior tidying and garden work. However, having regard to photographs and the oral evidence, I am only satisfied that approximately half of the work claimed was attributable to breaches of tenant obligations. I award $300 for exterior tidying and garden work.

The landlord claimed rubbish removal of $325.00 for disposing of some timber pallets. Having regard to the photographs and claims for disposal of similar material and volumes, I award $200.

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 following a flood and wall/paintwork damage. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The landlord claimed $1,000 for the carpet, being the insurance excess. It also provided evidence that the replacement cost is in the vicinity of $4,000. The landlord has proved its claim for the carpet, and I award the excess as claimed.

The landlord also claimed $2,745 for repairing paint and wall damage. The claim for damage is proved. However, the paint work was not new or pristine at the start of the tenancy. I have considered betterment and depreciation. In calculating depreciation, I have taken account of the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. I award $1,830.00 for paint repairs.

The landlord also claimed $552.40 for a broken window. The evidence was that the window was broken by a stone flicking up when the tenant mowed the lawn. That is accidental, not careless or intentional damage. The claim for glazing is dismissed.

As the landlord was substantially successful, I have awarded reimbursement of the Tribunal application fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4917054 — net $4,655.05 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$2,678.57	Rent arrears
Water rates	$618.04	Water rates
Cleaning	$208.00	Cleaning
Lawns and Garden work	$300.00	Lawns and Garden work
Repairs: Insurance excess - carpet damage	$1,000.00	Repairs: Insurance excess - carpet damage
Repairs: Wall damage and paint repairs	$1,830.00	Repairs: Wall damage and paint repairs
Rubbish removal	$200.00	Rubbish removal
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$4,655.05
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,655.05

Order

Cogan Young and Taryn Young must pay Red Hot Real Estate Limited As Agent For Jill And Howard Smith $4,655.05 immediately, calculated as shown in table below. DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears$2,678.57 Water rates$618.04 Cleaning$208.00 Lawns and Garden work$300.00 Repairs: Insurance excess - carpet damage$1,000.00 Repairs: Wall damage and paint repairs$1,830.00 Rubbish removal$200.00 Filing fee reimbursement$20.44 Total award$6,855.05 Bond$2,200.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$4,655.05
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,200.00 (5433960-002) to Red Hot Real Estate Limited As Agent For Jill And Howard Smith immediately.
The landlord’s claim for a window repair is dismissed.

Reasons

A representative of the landlord attended the hearing. The tenants did not attend.
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 and water rates?

The tenancy ended on 27 May 2024. The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amounts 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 did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
The landlord provided photographs and invoices for costs incurred. The cleaning costs were established.
The landlord claimed $598.00 for exterior tidying and garden work. However, having regard to photographs and the oral evidence, I am only satisfied that approximately half of the work claimed was attributable to breaches of tenant obligations. I award $300 for exterior tidying and garden work.
The landlord claimed rubbish removal of $325.00 for disposing of some timber pallets. Having regard to the photographs and claims for disposal of similar material and volumes, I award $200.

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 following a flood and wall/paintwork damage. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord claimed $1,000 for the carpet, being the insurance excess. It also provided evidence that the replacement cost is in the vicinity of $4,000. The landlord has proved its claim for the carpet, and I award the excess as claimed.
The landlord also claimed $2,745 for repairing paint and wall damage. The claim for damage is proved. However, the paint work was not new or pristine at the start of the tenancy. I have considered betterment and depreciation. In calculating depreciation, I have taken account of the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. I award $1,830.00 for paint repairs.
The landlord also claimed $552.40 for a broken window. The evidence was that the window was broken by a stone flicking up when the tenant mowed the lawn. That is accidental, not careless or intentional damage. The claim for glazing is dismissed.
As the landlord was substantially successful, I have awarded reimbursement of the Tribunal application fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4917054 — Property damage at 58 Rothesay Road, Parklands, Christchurch 8083

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4917054 — Property damage at 58 Rothesay Road, Parklands, Christchurch 8083

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

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

Dismissed claims

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