What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4987909?

The tribunal order states: Joshua Edmonds and Vicky Edmonds must pay Inhouse Rentals Limited As

How much money was awarded in case 4987909?

Cleaning: $2,130.00 awarded to landlord; Compensation: $890.00 awarded to landlord; Eviction Fee: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 4795029 D…: $15,187.45 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $247.25 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $4,550.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Spa Cover: $350.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4987909?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4987909?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11433683-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4987909?

The tribunal order states: Joshua Edmonds and Vicky Edmonds must pay Inhouse Rentals Limited As

How much money was awarded in case 4987909?

Cleaning: $2,130.00 awarded to landlord; Compensation: $890.00 awarded to landlord; Eviction Fee: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 4795029 D…: $15,187.45 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $247.25 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $4,550.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Spa Cover: $350.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4987909?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4987909?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11433683-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

50 Allenby Road, Papatoetoe, Auckland 2025 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4987909 — Property damage

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4987909 — net $23,581.70 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Previous order application 4795029 dated 29/02/2024	$15,187.45	Previous order application 4795029 dated 29/02/2024
Repairs: Insurance excess	$4,550.00	Repairs: Insurance excess
Replace furnishings: spa cover	$350.00	Replace furnishings: spa cover
Eviction fee	$200.00	Eviction fee
Cleaning: rubbish, lawns, bin hire	$2,130.00	Cleaning: rubbish, lawns, bin hire
compensation rent loss	$890.00	compensation rent loss
Lock/key replacement	$247.25	Lock/key replacement
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$23,581.70
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$23,581.70

Order

Joshua Edmonds and Vicky Edmonds must pay Inhouse Rentals Limited As Agent For High Progress Investments Ltd $23,581.70 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The Landlord attended the hearing. The Tenant did not appear.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The matter was adjourned from the last hearing to enable the Landlord to serve the Tenant as they had filed their application to the Tribunal two months after the tenancy had ended.
The Landlord served the Tenant’s father and provided photographic evidence. I am satisfied service has been effected and the Tenant is aware of todays proceedings.
At the hearing, the Landlord withdrew their claims for exemplary damages and hydrojetting.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 26 March 2024.The landlord was awarded rent arrears during mediation on 29 February 2024 of $15187.45 (case reference 4795029). When the Landlord was asked what amount of rent they were claiming since that Order was made, the Landlord did not provide an updated rent summary to show what had been paid and what was owing since the Order was made. The Landlord explained the bond had been applied to the rent arrears but nothing further was paid. They then proceeded to give details of a few further payments owing. There was no rent summary to verify these calculations.
For this reason, I have not made a new Order for rent but incorporated the previous Mediators Order into this one.

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 submitted the Tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. Invoices were provided for two bin hires, cleaning and mowing of the lawns. Entry inspection photographs were provided and a physical outgoing inspection report was handed up during the hearing.
The outgoing report was in black and white and the photographs from the report were very small so it was very difficult to see any detail in the photos. The written part of the report did confirm that the property was not clean in a lot of areas. The amount of rubbish present, what was abandoned, the extent of the dirt and damage was unable to be assessed properly by the photographs provided. I could see there were bags of rubbish outside on the grass, clothes and broken furniture, food on the kitchen bench and some dirty window sills inside the house but not the actual extent of cleaning or damage from the photographs. It is the Landlords onus to bring the evidence to the Tribunal to prove their case and it is not for the Tribunal to ask the Landlord to provide better evidence.
For this reason, I have awarded the claim for cleaning because the written report verifies this, the mowing of the lawns because the photographs show overgrown grass but only half the claim for the bin hire. I could not assess the amount of rubbish properly and what was actually abandoned goods which the landlord was going to store.
The amounts ordered are proved.
The Tenant failed to return the keys at the end of the tenancy so a locksmith was required. An invoice was provided for this cost.
The amount ordered is 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 following damage was caused during the tenancy: damage to the walls and skirting from scribble marks, dents, LED stickers, damage to drawers, cupboard and wardrobe, carpet damage and curtain track damage. The insurance report has verified the damages. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved. Loss of rent
The Landlord claimed two weeks loss of rent due to the property having to be cleaned up and ready to re-let. I am unable to assess how much time this would have taken because the exit inspection photos were difficult to assess. The Landlord submitted the cleaning took days. The insurance claim letter confirmed what some of the repairs were. It is reasonable to expect Landlords undertake their own deep clean and maintenance in between tenancies. I accept it would have taken sometime to clean and bring up to standard however without sufficient evidence provided from the landlord as to timeframes of how long it took for example a letter from the cleaners and tradespersons, the appropriate amount to award is one week’s rent.
The amount ordered is proved. Storage of goods
The Landlord claimed for cost of storage of abandoned goods until the Tenants came to collect it. There was a letter advising the Tenants to collect their goods which the Landlord stated happened on 6 April 2024. There was no evidence of the actual abandoned goods or the cost to store the goods in a storage facility. The landlord charged rent for it instead. The Landlord has also already been awarded for loss of rent for one week.
For these reasons, the amount claimed is dismissed. Eviction fee
The Landlord has claimed the eviction fee and provided the receipt.
The amount sought is proved. Previous filing fee
The landlord claimed a previous filing fee however this should have been claimed at the time that application was made to the Tribunal.
The claim is dismissed.
As the Landlord has been substantially successful, the Tenant shall pay their filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4987909 — net $23,581.70 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Previous order application 4795029 dated 29/02/2024	$15,187.45	Previous order application 4795029 dated 29/02/2024
Repairs: Insurance excess	$4,550.00	Repairs: Insurance excess
Replace furnishings: spa cover	$350.00	Replace furnishings: spa cover
Eviction fee	$200.00	Eviction fee
Cleaning: rubbish, lawns, bin hire	$2,130.00	Cleaning: rubbish, lawns, bin hire
compensation rent loss	$890.00	compensation rent loss
Lock/key replacement	$247.25	Lock/key replacement
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$23,581.70
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$23,581.70

Order

Joshua Edmonds and Vicky Edmonds must pay Inhouse Rentals Limited As Agent For High Progress Investments Ltd $23,581.70 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The Landlord attended the hearing. The Tenant did not appear.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The matter was adjourned from the last hearing to enable the Landlord to serve the Tenant as they had filed their application to the Tribunal two months after the tenancy had ended.
The Landlord served the Tenant’s father and provided photographic evidence. I am satisfied service has been effected and the Tenant is aware of todays proceedings.
At the hearing, the Landlord withdrew their claims for exemplary damages and hydrojetting.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 26 March 2024.The landlord was awarded rent arrears during mediation on 29 February 2024 of $15187.45 (case reference 4795029). When the Landlord was asked what amount of rent they were claiming since that Order was made, the Landlord did not provide an updated rent summary to show what had been paid and what was owing since the Order was made. The Landlord explained the bond had been applied to the rent arrears but nothing further was paid. They then proceeded to give details of a few further payments owing. There was no rent summary to verify these calculations.
For this reason, I have not made a new Order for rent but incorporated the previous Mediators Order into this one.

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 submitted the Tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. Invoices were provided for two bin hires, cleaning and mowing of the lawns. Entry inspection photographs were provided and a physical outgoing inspection report was handed up during the hearing.
The outgoing report was in black and white and the photographs from the report were very small so it was very difficult to see any detail in the photos. The written part of the report did confirm that the property was not clean in a lot of areas. The amount of rubbish present, what was abandoned, the extent of the dirt and damage was unable to be assessed properly by the photographs provided. I could see there were bags of rubbish outside on the grass, clothes and broken furniture, food on the kitchen bench and some dirty window sills inside the house but not the actual extent of cleaning or damage from the photographs. It is the Landlords onus to bring the evidence to the Tribunal to prove their case and it is not for the Tribunal to ask the Landlord to provide better evidence.
For this reason, I have awarded the claim for cleaning because the written report verifies this, the mowing of the lawns because the photographs show overgrown grass but only half the claim for the bin hire. I could not assess the amount of rubbish properly and what was actually abandoned goods which the landlord was going to store.
The amounts ordered are proved.
The Tenant failed to return the keys at the end of the tenancy so a locksmith was required. An invoice was provided for this cost.
The amount ordered is 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 following damage was caused during the tenancy: damage to the walls and skirting from scribble marks, dents, LED stickers, damage to drawers, cupboard and wardrobe, carpet damage and curtain track damage. The insurance report has verified the damages. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved. Loss of rent
The Landlord claimed two weeks loss of rent due to the property having to be cleaned up and ready to re-let. I am unable to assess how much time this would have taken because the exit inspection photos were difficult to assess. The Landlord submitted the cleaning took days. The insurance claim letter confirmed what some of the repairs were. It is reasonable to expect Landlords undertake their own deep clean and maintenance in between tenancies. I accept it would have taken sometime to clean and bring up to standard however without sufficient evidence provided from the landlord as to timeframes of how long it took for example a letter from the cleaners and tradespersons, the appropriate amount to award is one week’s rent.
The amount ordered is proved. Storage of goods
The Landlord claimed for cost of storage of abandoned goods until the Tenants came to collect it. There was a letter advising the Tenants to collect their goods which the Landlord stated happened on 6 April 2024. There was no evidence of the actual abandoned goods or the cost to store the goods in a storage facility. The landlord charged rent for it instead. The Landlord has also already been awarded for loss of rent for one week.
For these reasons, the amount claimed is dismissed. Eviction fee
The Landlord has claimed the eviction fee and provided the receipt.
The amount sought is proved. Previous filing fee
The landlord claimed a previous filing fee however this should have been claimed at the time that application was made to the Tribunal.
The claim is dismissed.
As the Landlord has been substantially successful, the Tenant shall pay their filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4987909 — Property damage at 50 Allenby Road, Papatoetoe, Auckland 2025

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4987909 — Property damage at 50 Allenby Road, Papatoetoe, Auckland 2025

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?

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

How much is owed for rent?

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