Published tribunal order
Tenancy Tribunal case 4974334 — Rent arrears at 256 Kingseat Road, Kingseat, RD 4, Pukekohe 2679
Decided 23 Dec 2024 · Published 23 Dec 2024 · Application 4974334
Landlord favoured
- Rent arrears
- Cleanliness
- Lock/Key Replacement
Order
- Kasia Conaghan must pay 23 Property Management Limited As Agent For Simon Bennett $6,390.16 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:
- This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 25 June 2024 under application 4872340.
Reasons
- The landlord attended the hearing which was held on 26 November 2024 by teleconference. The Tribunal was unable to contact the tenant on the contact number provided in the application. I proceeded with the hearing in the tenant’s absence as I was satisfied that adequate service of the hearing notice had been completed.
- The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
- The hearing was adjourned to allow the landlord an opportunity to provide the final inspection report and photographs of the condition of the property at the end of the tenancy to support their claim for compensation for cleaning, rubbish removal, lawn mowing and gardening.
How much is owed for rent arrears?
- The tenancy was terminated by the Tribunal on 25 June 2024 (application 4872340). At that time, the Tribunal awarded rent arrears to 24 June 2024 of $6,974.86. An eviction took place on 28 June 2024 and the landlord seeks additional rent to that date (being $362.86). The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing.
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 landlord claims the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. The landlord seeks $1,472.00 for cleaning, removal of rubbish, lawn mowing and gardening.
- The burden of proof lies with the landlord to demonstrate, on the balance of probabilities, that the tenant has breached these obligations. Evidence such as photographs, inspection reports, or corroborating testimony is typically required to substantiate a claim for compensation.
- In this case, the landlord has provided an invoice, which on its own does not constitute sufficient evidence of the condition of the premises at the end of the tenancy. While the property manager provided oral evidence that the premises were left in poor condition, this evidence is not corroborated by photographs or any contemporaneous documentation of the premises’ state at the conclusion of the tenancy. The landlord also submitted an earlier inspection report from 22 May 2024, which indicated the property was in an unclean state with rubbish present. However, this earlier report does not directly establish the condition of the premises at the end of the tenancy.
- Despite the tenant not attending the hearing to contest the claim, the onus remains on the landlord to prove their case. Oral evidence from the property manager, while helpful, is not as persuasive as photographic evidence, which is the standard form of proof in these types of claims. The absence of such evidence limits the ability to fully assess the extent of any breach by the tenant or the reasonableness of the costs incurred by the landlord.
- Given the oral evidence from the property manager and the lack of contest from the tenant, I find it appropriate to apportion some compensation to the landlord. However, the amount awarded will be less than the full claim due to the lack of proper supporting evidence. This decision serves as a caution to the landlord to ensure that future claims are supported by comprehensive evidence, particularly photographs, to substantiate the condition of the premises at the relevant time. Failure to do so may result in dismissal of claims in similar circumstances.
- I accept the landlord’s evidence that the tenant did not return the keys. The keys/locks had to be changed due to the eviction process. The amount ordered is proved. Incorporated order
- On the Tribunal made an order relating to this tenancy, for rent arrears to 24 June 2024 ($6,974.86), plus the filing fee ($20.44), less the bond of $2,540.00, totalling $4,455.30. The previous order is incorporated into this order for enforcement purposes. Filing fee
- As the landlord has been substantially successful with the claim, I consider it reasonable to order the tenant to reimburse the filing fee.