What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5019648?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5019648?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5019648?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5019648?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11533490-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5019648?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5019648?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5019648?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5019648?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11533490-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

40 Waitangi Street, Gisborne, Gisborne 4010 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5019648 — Rent arrears

Order

The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Mr Thompson, the landlord, attended the hearing. The tenant, Kleshay Blake, did not attend the hearing.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, outgoings and compensation following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The landlord said the tenancy began on 13 June 2024 and ended on 14 October 2024. Rent was $650.00 per week. The landlord provided a copy of a handwritten diary note with some figures and dates. The note indicated a total paid including bond of $9,900.00. There were also calculations on the same diary page for power and gas amounts. The diary note did not contain specific information such as rent periods covered, amounts of rent due, amounts paid, dates they were paid, nor did it contain a cumulative rent arrears balance. In reviewing the documents before the hearing, I noticed this and directed the landlord to provide a proper and complete rent summary, using the template for a rent summary on the Tenancy Services website as an example, by the day before the hearing. The landlord contacted the Registry the day before the hearing to say he had already provided his rent summary and again attached a photograph of his same handwritten diary note that was originally provided.
Section 30 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”) provides that every landlord under a tenancy to which the RTA applies shall keep or cause to be kept proper business records showing all payments of rent paid by or on behalf of the tenant, sufficient to enable the landlord to comply within a reasonable time with any request made by the tenant under section 29(3), and any amount by way of bond paid by the tenant on or after 1 May 1996. These records must be kept for 7 tax years after the tax year to which they relate.
The landlord’s handwritten diary notes do not constitute proper business records that show all rent payments made by the tenant, sufficient to comply with section 30 RTA. The landlord did not provide any other such business records or complete rent summary. As there is insufficient evidence provided by the landlord for his claim for rent arrears owing of $1,800.00 to 14 October 2024, the end of the tenancy, I must dismiss this claim. Outgoings
Similarly, the landlord relied on his handwritten diary note (on the same page as the rent information) about charges for power and gas. The landlord did not provide a full copy of the Tenancy Agreement, so there was no copy of any part of the Tenancy Agreement relating to outgoings, or any other evidence about what was agreed between the parties about outgoings. Mr Thompson said the property he owns comprises a 3-bedroom house at the front of the property, which was the subject of this tenancy, and a 2-bedroom unit at the back of the property, which is a separate tenancy. He said the power and gas are on the same bill for both tenancies, that the power is on the same line for both tenancy properties, but there are separate metres for each for the power, and traditionally the gas bill has been split as 60% payable by the front house tenant and 40% gas payable by the back unit tenant. The landlord said he had asked the tenant to put the power and gas bill in her own name, but it transpired she had not done so when he heard from the tenant in his back unit on the same property that her power had gone off. As indicated above, the landlord did not provide any evidence relating to this power and gas arrangement with the tenant. The landlord said he asked the back unit tenant to put the power and gas bill in her name and told her he would pay her for this tenant’s share of the power and gas, so the back unit tenant would not be out of pocket. He sought to recoup the costs of him paying the back unit tenant for this tenant’s share of the power and gas. The landlord claimed $597.51 for power and $220.42 for gas, with a sub-total of $817.93 but then said there was a further bill on 14 October 2024 for $65.87 for power and $49.14 for gas, bringing the total to $932.94. Mr Thompson then said he realised these were only estimated bills and there was an actual reading down after the tenant left, so he paid a further $700.00 to the back unit tenant for this bill, but this actual reading period was from 11 October 2024 to 12 November 2024, which was largely after the tenancy ended. He claimed a total of $1,632.94 for power and gas. The landlord did not provide copies of any of the invoices for the power and gas, only some texts between he and the back unit tenant with some calculations and figures in this regard. The landlord said that, as the tenant left the hot water running and ran up the power bill, and his new tenant could not move in until a few days after this tenant left, because of the mess and damage, he wanted to claim all the power and gas he paid to the back unit tenant.
The landlord has not provided any power and gas bills, or any confirmation of the arrangement with the tenant for the payment of power and gas (via a complete Tenancy Agreement or other document), or ledgers, or communication between he and the tenant, to prove what the tenant owes for power and gas, and for what he has paid to cover what the tenant owes. Due to this insufficient evidence, I must dismiss this claim for power and gas. Other tenancy obligations
The landlord claimed for rubbish removal initially but withdrew this claim during the hearing.

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 said he was not aware of the amount of his insurance excess, that it was in the Tenancy Agreement, but he did not have a complete copy of the Tenancy Agreement with this anymore as he had given his copy to the tenant. He said this information was in his documents at home but was not available at the hearing.
The landlord said the tenant caused, or allowed to be caused by others, the following damage was caused during the tenancy: Fence damage a. Damage to an outside steel fence. The landlord claimed $300.00 to repair the fence and provided a photograph of an outside steel fence with some dents in the middle of one panel. The landlord said he believed this had been caused by one of the tenant’s friends driving into the fence during the tenancy. He provided a copy of an invoice for the cost of 2 steel panels for a total of $60.47 dated 30 September 2024. He said he had paid his brother $200.00 to paint the fence, which was not confirmed by any receipt for this. b. The landlord did not provide any Ingoing Inspection Report, or any photographs of the property at the start of the tenancy, nor did he provide any Final Inspection Report at the end of the tenancy. He provided some photographs which he said were taken during the tenancy, such as that of the dented fence, and some other photographs of other damage that he said were taken after the tenancy ended. c. The landlord did not provide any confirmation by the tenant, or statements from any witnesses to the fence damage, though he said it had been witnessed by some neighbours. As there was no evidence of the fence’s condition at the start of the tenancy, and no evidence of how the damage was caused during the tenancy, I find there is insufficient evidence to prove this claim and so must dismiss this claim. Hole in shed wall d. The landlord said the tenant caused a hole in the shed wall during the tenancy and provided a photograph of a hole in a yellow wall. He claimed $500.00 to repair this but clarified he had not yet had this repaired. He did not provide any quotes or invoices to support this claim, nor were there any photographs of the shed wall at the start of the tenancy. Due to insufficient evidence to prove this claim, I must also dismiss this claim. Locks and door handles e. The landlord claimed that he had to replace locks, keys and missing door handles at the end of the tenancy. He said he had earlier put in new locks just a couple of weeks before the end of the tenancy, at the tenant’s request, but these were damaged again. He claimed $626.75 for this and provided an invoice to this effect dated 17 October 2024. He provided a photograph of a door with a missing handle and said this was taken after the end of the tenancy. There were no photographs of this door at the start of the tenancy, no Final Inspection report about the locks or keys, nor were there any photographs or other evidence to indicate the need to replace the locks, including any communication between the landlord and tenant about this, for example. Due to insufficient evidence, I dismiss this claim. Hole in the floor – end bedroom f. The landlord said the tenant cut a hole through carpet and the floor in the end bedroom and claimed $500.00 to repair this. He provided a photograph of this hole in the floor. He did not provide any quotes or invoices or receipts to support the amount claimed. Nor was there any evidence provided by the landlord of the condition of the floor at the start of the tenancy, nor evidence of any communication between the parties about this. I dismiss this claim due to insufficient evidence. g. The landlord withdrew the remaining claims for compensation, during the hearing.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5019648 — Rent arrears at 40 Waitangi Street, Gisborne, Gisborne 4010

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5019648 — Rent arrears at 40 Waitangi Street, Gisborne, Gisborne 4010

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions