What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5002688?

The tribunal order states: Cassandra carencia logan tarei must pay Asian Community Engagement Trust

How much money was awarded in case 5002688?

Cleaning: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $4,100.00 awarded to landlord; Hole In Wall: $408.25 awarded to landlord; Toilet Tank And Oven Light: $218.50 awarded to landlord; Walls: $300.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5002688?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5002688?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11526519-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5002688?

The tribunal order states: Cassandra carencia logan tarei must pay Asian Community Engagement Trust

How much money was awarded in case 5002688?

Cleaning: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $4,100.00 awarded to landlord; Hole In Wall: $408.25 awarded to landlord; Toilet Tank And Oven Light: $218.50 awarded to landlord; Walls: $300.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5002688?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5002688?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11526519-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 2, 49 Sunnyside Road, Sunnyvale, Auckland 0612 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5002688 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5002688 — net $2,053.75 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 11 July 2024	$4,100.00	Rent arrears to 11 July 2024
Cleaning	$200.00	Cleaning
Repairs: Hole in wall	$408.25	Repairs: Hole in wall
Repairs: Walls	$300.00	Repairs: Walls
Repairs: Toilet tank and oven light	$218.50	Repairs: Toilet tank and oven light
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,053.75
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,053.75

Order

Cassandra carencia logan tarei must pay Asian Community Engagement Trust $2,053.75 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,200.00 (6498978-008) to Asian Community Engagement Trust immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
As the applicant, the landlord must prove their claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities. This means that they must establish that what they are claiming is more likely than not. This is referred to as the “burden of proof.” Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
As noted by the District Court in Katipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: ...[L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit of not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.
I do not need to be completely certain, but I need to be more certain than uncertain. In deciding any particular claim, I must consider all the evidence presented (including oral evidence at the hearing). I must weigh this evidence to decide what is more likely.

RENT ARREARS

The tenancy ended on 11 July 2024. The landlord provided rent records and which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy, namely $4,100.00. The landlord’s claim for rent arrears is granted in full for this amount.

CLEANING

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 claims the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy. The landlord seeks compensation as follows: a. Cleaning: $1,035.00 b. Pest control: $283.36
The landlord submitted photographs of the property taken at the end of the tenancy. These photographs show the property is mostly reasonably clean and tidy however, I accept that the oven and kitchen cupboards are dirty. Some items have also been left at the property by the tenant, including a paddling pool and trike.
The landlord claims there were cockroaches at the property because the tenant left food out. No photographs of any rubbish or food are apparent from the photographs taken at the end of the tenancy. Whilst I accept there were areas of the house that required further cleaning, I do not consider the property was in a condition that would attract cockroaches. It is mostly clean and tidy. This claim for compensation is dismissed.
The landlord’s claim for general cleaning is granted for an adjusted amount of $200.00. The Tribunal sees numerous applications for cleaning. The average hourly rate is $50.00 per hour. I consider it would have taken no longer than 4 hours to bring this property to a reasonably clean and tidy standard.

DAMAGE

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.
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.
In Nixon v Geal-Otter DC North Shore, 30 January 1996, [1996] RTHNZ 2, 1996 WL 35049225, his Honour Judge Thorburn held: Adjudicators and the Court must be careful to recognise that in any tenancy there will be a deterioration of condition because of fair wear and tear. It can be no other way. Mere use of premises will by the law of inevitability produce a deterioration of condition.
The landlord had difficulty articulating the damage caused by the tenant. The evidence given at the hearing was that the tenant was responsible for the following damage caused during the tenancy: a. Toilet tank loose and broken oven light:$218.50 b. Hole in the wall:$408.25 c. Marks to the wall:$3,203.90
I deal with each matter in turn below. Toilet take loose and broken oven light
The landlord gave evidence this property was newly built and the tenant was the first person to live in it. The landlord claims the toilet tank was tightly fitted at the beginning of the tenancy and very loose at the end.
The landlord also gave evidence that oil from the tenant’s cooking damaged the oven light.
Based on the evidence given by the landlord, I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the toilet tank and oven light were damaged during the tenancy. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability.
The landlord submitted an invoice for $218.50 to repair the toilet tank and oven light. The landlord’s claim for compensation is granted in full for this amount. Hole in wall
The landlord submitted photographs of the property taken at the beginning of the tenancy. No holes in the walls are apparent.
The landlord gave evidence that the tenant opened one of the internal doors forcefully. This caused the doorstop to break and the door handle made a hole in the wall. A photograph of the hole was submitted to the Tribunal.
I find that the hole in the wall was caused during the tenancy. The damage is more than fair wear and tear and the tenant has not disproved liability.
The landlord submitted an invoice for $408.25 to repair the hole. The landlord’s claim for compensation is granted in full for this amount. Marks to the wall
The landlord claims the tenant caused lots of marks to the walls in the property.
The photographs of the property taken at the beginning of the tenancy show the walls freshly painted and absent of any marks. The photographs taken at the end of the tenancy show scuff marks to the walls, scratches and some paint has chipped.
This tenancy was approximately one year long. I consider most of the marks to the walls to be fair wear and tear however, I accept that some areas where there are deep scratches, missing paint and damaged jib are not fair wear and tear. The tenant has not disproved liability for this damage.
The landlord submitted an invoice for $3,203.90. This invoice referred to a number of items of general maintenance, including $1,000.00 for painting the walls.
The landlord has not proven that any of the other items listed in the invoice were caused during the tenancy or were the fault of the tenant.
The landlord’s claim for compensation to repair the walls is granted for an adjusted amount of $300.00, which I consider fairly reflects the damage caused by the tenant that is not fair wear and tear.

FILING FEE

Because Asian Community Engagement Trust has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5002688 — net $2,053.75 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 11 July 2024	$4,100.00	Rent arrears to 11 July 2024
Cleaning	$200.00	Cleaning
Repairs: Hole in wall	$408.25	Repairs: Hole in wall
Repairs: Walls	$300.00	Repairs: Walls
Repairs: Toilet tank and oven light	$218.50	Repairs: Toilet tank and oven light
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,053.75
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,053.75

Order

Cassandra carencia logan tarei must pay Asian Community Engagement Trust $2,053.75 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,200.00 (6498978-008) to Asian Community Engagement Trust immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
As the applicant, the landlord must prove their claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities. This means that they must establish that what they are claiming is more likely than not. This is referred to as the “burden of proof.” Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
As noted by the District Court in Katipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: ...[L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit of not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.
I do not need to be completely certain, but I need to be more certain than uncertain. In deciding any particular claim, I must consider all the evidence presented (including oral evidence at the hearing). I must weigh this evidence to decide what is more likely.

RENT ARREARS

The tenancy ended on 11 July 2024. The landlord provided rent records and which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy, namely $4,100.00. The landlord’s claim for rent arrears is granted in full for this amount.

CLEANING

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 claims the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy. The landlord seeks compensation as follows: a. Cleaning: $1,035.00 b. Pest control: $283.36
The landlord submitted photographs of the property taken at the end of the tenancy. These photographs show the property is mostly reasonably clean and tidy however, I accept that the oven and kitchen cupboards are dirty. Some items have also been left at the property by the tenant, including a paddling pool and trike.
The landlord claims there were cockroaches at the property because the tenant left food out. No photographs of any rubbish or food are apparent from the photographs taken at the end of the tenancy. Whilst I accept there were areas of the house that required further cleaning, I do not consider the property was in a condition that would attract cockroaches. It is mostly clean and tidy. This claim for compensation is dismissed.
The landlord’s claim for general cleaning is granted for an adjusted amount of $200.00. The Tribunal sees numerous applications for cleaning. The average hourly rate is $50.00 per hour. I consider it would have taken no longer than 4 hours to bring this property to a reasonably clean and tidy standard.

DAMAGE

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.
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.
In Nixon v Geal-Otter DC North Shore, 30 January 1996, [1996] RTHNZ 2, 1996 WL 35049225, his Honour Judge Thorburn held: Adjudicators and the Court must be careful to recognise that in any tenancy there will be a deterioration of condition because of fair wear and tear. It can be no other way. Mere use of premises will by the law of inevitability produce a deterioration of condition.
The landlord had difficulty articulating the damage caused by the tenant. The evidence given at the hearing was that the tenant was responsible for the following damage caused during the tenancy: a. Toilet tank loose and broken oven light:$218.50 b. Hole in the wall:$408.25 c. Marks to the wall:$3,203.90
I deal with each matter in turn below. Toilet take loose and broken oven light
The landlord gave evidence this property was newly built and the tenant was the first person to live in it. The landlord claims the toilet tank was tightly fitted at the beginning of the tenancy and very loose at the end.
The landlord also gave evidence that oil from the tenant’s cooking damaged the oven light.
Based on the evidence given by the landlord, I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the toilet tank and oven light were damaged during the tenancy. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability.
The landlord submitted an invoice for $218.50 to repair the toilet tank and oven light. The landlord’s claim for compensation is granted in full for this amount. Hole in wall
The landlord submitted photographs of the property taken at the beginning of the tenancy. No holes in the walls are apparent.
The landlord gave evidence that the tenant opened one of the internal doors forcefully. This caused the doorstop to break and the door handle made a hole in the wall. A photograph of the hole was submitted to the Tribunal.
I find that the hole in the wall was caused during the tenancy. The damage is more than fair wear and tear and the tenant has not disproved liability.
The landlord submitted an invoice for $408.25 to repair the hole. The landlord’s claim for compensation is granted in full for this amount. Marks to the wall
The landlord claims the tenant caused lots of marks to the walls in the property.
The photographs of the property taken at the beginning of the tenancy show the walls freshly painted and absent of any marks. The photographs taken at the end of the tenancy show scuff marks to the walls, scratches and some paint has chipped.
This tenancy was approximately one year long. I consider most of the marks to the walls to be fair wear and tear however, I accept that some areas where there are deep scratches, missing paint and damaged jib are not fair wear and tear. The tenant has not disproved liability for this damage.
The landlord submitted an invoice for $3,203.90. This invoice referred to a number of items of general maintenance, including $1,000.00 for painting the walls.
The landlord has not proven that any of the other items listed in the invoice were caused during the tenancy or were the fault of the tenant.
The landlord’s claim for compensation to repair the walls is granted for an adjusted amount of $300.00, which I consider fairly reflects the damage caused by the tenant that is not fair wear and tear.

FILING FEE

Because Asian Community Engagement Trust has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5002688 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 2, 49 Sunnyside Road, Sunnyvale, Auckland 0612

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5002688 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 2, 49 Sunnyside Road, Sunnyvale, Auckland 0612

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

RENT ARREARS

CLEANING

DAMAGE

FILING FEE

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

RENT ARREARS

CLEANING

DAMAGE

FILING FEE

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions