What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4933075?

The tribunal order states: Elise Parkinson must pay Apm Property Services Limited $7,621.24

How much money was awarded in case 4933075?

Application Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $180.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns: $285.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $160.33 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $4,800.00 awarded to landlord; Front Door: $180.00 awarded to landlord; Indoor Doors X3: $450.00 awarded to landlord; Kitchen Vinyl: $632.50 awarded to landlord; Walls and Doors: $1,300.00 awarded to landlord; Window In Laundry: $130.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Door Locks X3: $360.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Door Stopper X2: $90.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Indoor Doors X2: $560.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Window Handle: $160.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $1,106.41 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4933075?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4933075?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10913190-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4933075?

The tribunal order states: Elise Parkinson must pay Apm Property Services Limited $7,621.24

How much money was awarded in case 4933075?

Application Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $180.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns: $285.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $160.33 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $4,800.00 awarded to landlord; Front Door: $180.00 awarded to landlord; Indoor Doors X3: $450.00 awarded to landlord; Kitchen Vinyl: $632.50 awarded to landlord; Walls and Doors: $1,300.00 awarded to landlord; Window In Laundry: $130.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Door Locks X3: $360.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Door Stopper X2: $90.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Indoor Doors X2: $560.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Window Handle: $160.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $1,106.41 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4933075?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4933075?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10913190-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

18 Solar Road, Glen Eden, Auckland 0602 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4933075 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4933075 — net $7,621.24 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 24 June 2024	$4,800.00	Rent arrears to 24 June 2024
Water rates	$1,106.41	Water rates
Carpet cleaning	$180.00	Carpet cleaning
Lock/key replacement	$160.33	Lock/key replacement
Repairs: indoor doors x3	$450.00	Repairs: indoor doors x3
Replace furnishings: indoor doors x2	$560.00	Replace furnishings: indoor doors x2
Replace furnishings: door locks x3	$360.00	Replace furnishings: door locks x3
Replace furnishings: door stopper x2	$90.00	Replace furnishings: door stopper x2
Repairs: walls and doors	$1,300.00	Repairs: walls and doors
Repairs: window in laundry	$130.00	Repairs: window in laundry
Replace furnishings: window handle	$160.00	Replace furnishings: window handle
Repairs: front door	$180.00	Repairs: front door
Repairs: vinyl	$632.50	Repairs: vinyl
Lawns	$285.00	Lawns
Application fee	$27.00	Application fee
Net award	$7,621.24
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$7,621.24

Both parties attended the hearing.

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

The bond has already been refunded to the landlord. Both parties agreed that the bond amount of $2,800.00 was to be deducted from any sum payable by the tenant to the landlord. For this reason, I have included it in the table above.

As the applicant, the landlord is required to prove each claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

There was some uncertainty about when the tenancy ended however, both parties accepted that the tenant remained in occupation of the premise until 24 June 2024. The landlord provided a rent summary, which proves the amount owing up to this date, namely $4,800.00.

The landlord provided water rates invoices from the water rates authority and a schedule of payments made by the tenant. These documents prove that the tenant owes $1,106.41 in outstanding water rates.

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 landlord claimed the tenant did not comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy and sought compensation for the following amounts: a. Eviction warrant:$200.00 b. Lock/key replacement:$200.33 c. Carpet cleaning:$180.00 d. Lawns:$285.00

I deal with each matter in turn below. Eviction warrant

Bailiffs attended the property on Monday, 24 June 2024. Both parties accepted the tenant had vacated the premises by this date.

The background to this case involves a prior mediation. The mediated order outlined a payment plan for the tenant to pay rent and arrears. It stipulated that the tenancy would end if the tenant was more than two working days behind in any of their payments. The tenant was more than two working days behind in their payment of rent due on 7 June 2024. The landlord allowed the tenant to remain in the property and no request for the tenant to vacate the premises was made. On 21 June 2024, the landlord contacted the tenant to advise that bailiffs would be attending the property on 24 June 2024. After receiving this email, the tenant vacated the premises.

The purpose of an eviction warrant is to forcibly remove a tenant who refuses to leave the property after the tenancy has ended. In this case, the landlord did not communicate with the tenant to advise that the tenancy had ended and the landlord would be taking possession. The landlord prematurely applied for an eviction warrant before the tenant was given a chance to leave the property voluntarily. When the tenant was advised that the tenancy had ended, the tenant promptly left the premises. In these circumstances, it is not fair and reasonable to award compensation of $200.00 to the landlord to cover the cost of the eviction warrant. The claim is dismissed. Lock/key replacement

The front door had an electronic lock activated by a pin number. The tenant accepted liability for the damaged striker plate kit, which prevented the door from locking properly. The tenant had completed a make-shift repair, but the striker plate kit needed to be properly replaced at the end of the tenancy. The tenant also accepted responsibility for the flat batteries that operated the digital lock.

Part of the locksmith’s invoice included work undertaken to replace the back door lock cylinder and supply two keys. The tenant said they were never provided keys to the backdoor and did not cause any damage to the lock. They stated the back door lock was old when they started the tenancy. The landlord accepted both these points. The cost of work undertaken to the back door was $40.00.

The backdoor required a new lock and set of keys, but this was not a result of any breach by the tenant. Therefore, the landlord’s claim for compensation for key/lock replacement is granted for an adjusted amount of $160.33. Carpet cleaning

The tenancy agreement allowed the tenant to keep a pet. The tenant had a small dog.

The tenant removed their belongings from the property and left the inside property in a clean and tidy condition. The landlord accepted this, however stated that the carpet smelt and had a lot of fur in it from the dog. I accept the landlord’s evidence that this was the case and that the carpet needed to be professionally cleaned to bring the property up to a reasonably clean and tidy condition. The landlord’s claim for compensation of $180.00 for carpet cleaning is granted. Lawns

The landlord provided photographs of the property at the beginning and end of the tenancy. The photographs taken at the beginning of the tenancy show the lawns neatly trimmed and tidy. The photographs taken at the end of the tenancy who the lawns overgrown and unruly. The lawns needed to be mowed to return to the property to a reasonably clean and tidy state. The landlord’s claim for compensation of $285.00 for lawnmowing is granted.

The amounts ordered above 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 landlord provided photographs of the property at the beginning of the tenancy. These photographs do not show any missing or damaged doors. There are no walls with holes in them or broken windows. In contrast, the photographs taken at the end of the tenancy show damaged doors, walls and a broken window. Based on these photographs, I find that the following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. Holes in doors b. Internal door missing c. Internal door removed and hinges broken d. Damaged door locks (x3) e. Damaged door stoppers (x2) f. Holes in walls g. Broken window in the laundry h. Broken window handle i. Broken front doorframe j. Vinyl lifting and broken in the living area

The damage is more than fair wear and tear and the tenant accepted responsibility for it.

The landlord provided a quote for the cost to repair the above damage. The landlord’s claim for compensation is granted for the following amounts: a. Repair 3 internal doors:$450.00 b. Install 2 new internal doors:$560.00 c. Install 3 new internal door locks:$360.00 d. Replace 2 door stoppers:$90.00 e. Repair holes in walls and doors:$1,300.00 f. Replace broken window in laundry:$130.00 g. Replace broken window handle:$160.00 h. Repair front doorframe:$180.00 i. Replace vinyl in living area:$632.50

The landlord claimed compensation to repair six door stoppers, but only provided photographs of two damaged doorstoppers. The landlord has not proven that six door stoppers were damaged during the tenancy. Therefore, the landlord’s claim for compensation is limited to the cost of two door stoppers.

The quote provided by the landlord recorded $700.00 to repair the window and tub in the laundry. For the reasons detailed below, I have dismissed the landlord’s claim for compensation to repair the tub. The landlord’s claim for compensation to repair the window has been granted for $130.00, which I consider to be a reasonable cost to repair a window.

The amounts ordered above are proved.

I have taken into account 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 taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.

I dismiss the landlord’s claims for compensation below: a. Replace exterior wall panel and paint b. Replace rotten laundry tub sideboards c. Repair upstairs bathroom

I deal with each matter in turn and provide me reasons. Exterior wall panel and paint

The landlord sought compensation of $880.00 to replace and paint an external wall panel. The landlord provided a photograph taken at the end of the tenancy, which shows the panel has a hole in it. The landlord provided a photograph taken at the beginning of the tenancy, which does not show any hole.

In response to questions from the Tribunal, the tenant stated that they did not cause the damage and had no knowledge of how it occurred.

I am not convinced on the balance of probabilities that the damage is not fair wear and tear. Fair wear and tear has been defined as the deterioration of premises due to both reasonable use and ordinary operation of natural forces, reasonable conduct on the part of the tenant being assumed. The amount of damage is not relevant. See discussion in Accessible Properties New Zealand Ltd v McKeefry [2019] NZTT 4114629, 4169403.

The panel is located on the exterior of the property and is subject to the elements. No evidence was given about the age of the panel, but it appears relatively old and weathered. It is quite plausible that the panel could have been damaged in a storm or strong wind blowing an object into it. The neighbouring panel is also missing some wood at the bottom. The hole is not very big. All of these factors point towards fair wear and tear, rather than intentional or careless damage.

The landlord’s claim for compensation to repair the external panel is dismissed. Laundry tub

The landlord provided a photograph of the laundry tub at the beginning and end of the tenancy. The photograph taken at the end of the tenancy shows some minor rust towards the top of the tub near the sink. The quote to repair refers to the need to replace “rotten laundry tub side boards.”

A laundry tub should be able to withstand exposure to a reasonable amount of water. No evidence was given about any unreasonable use of the laundry tub by the tenant. The rusting around the lip of the sink is minor and not unusual.

I am not convinced on the balance of probabilities that the damage is not fair wear and tear. Upstairs bathroom

The landlord sought compensation of $2,100.00 to repair the upstairs bathroom. The landlord claimed that the tenant caused water to spill onto the floor over time, which soaked through and caused rotting to the floorboards beneath. The landlord also claimed that the shoreline board was pulling away from the wall and the tenant should have advised them about this.

The tenant stated that they were not aware of the damage sustained to the underfloor area and did not notice the shoreline board had pulled away from the wall.

I am not convinced that the damage is not fair wear and tear on the balance of probabilities. A bathroom, especially the shower/bath area, is expected to be able to withstand a high level of exposure to water. The tenant accepted that sometimes her children splashed in the bath and water leaked over on to the floor, which she cleaned up. This is not unreasonable use of a bath. I accept the tenant’s evidence that they did not notice the shoreline moving away from the wall. It is minor and very difficult to see in the photographs. The issue does not appear to have been noticed at any inspections during the tenancy either, which highlights that careful attention is required to see the problem.

I find that on the balance of probabilities that the damage sustained is a result of reasonable use and ordinary operation of natural forces in the shower/bath area.

The landlord’s claim for compensation to repair the upstairs bathroom is dismissed. Filing fee

Because Apm Property Services Limited has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4933075 — net $7,621.24 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 24 June 2024	$4,800.00	Rent arrears to 24 June 2024
Water rates	$1,106.41	Water rates
Carpet cleaning	$180.00	Carpet cleaning
Lock/key replacement	$160.33	Lock/key replacement
Repairs: indoor doors x3	$450.00	Repairs: indoor doors x3
Replace furnishings: indoor doors x2	$560.00	Replace furnishings: indoor doors x2
Replace furnishings: door locks x3	$360.00	Replace furnishings: door locks x3
Replace furnishings: door stopper x2	$90.00	Replace furnishings: door stopper x2
Repairs: walls and doors	$1,300.00	Repairs: walls and doors
Repairs: window in laundry	$130.00	Repairs: window in laundry
Replace furnishings: window handle	$160.00	Replace furnishings: window handle
Repairs: front door	$180.00	Repairs: front door
Repairs: vinyl	$632.50	Repairs: vinyl
Lawns	$285.00	Lawns
Application fee	$27.00	Application fee
Net award	$7,621.24
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$7,621.24