What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5022040?

The tribunal order states: Shanika Makayla tinysha Manuel Le-Gros and Raymond Johnathan lee mori

How much money was awarded in case 5022040?

Cleaning: $448.50 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $345.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $245.30 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $247.28 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $281.75 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $271.87 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $69.10 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,036.70 awarded to landlord; Unpaid Water And Electricity Rates: $1,337.76 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5022040?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5022040?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11305092-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5022040?

The tribunal order states: Shanika Makayla tinysha Manuel Le-Gros and Raymond Johnathan lee mori

How much money was awarded in case 5022040?

Cleaning: $448.50 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $345.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $245.30 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $247.28 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $281.75 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $271.87 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $69.10 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,036.70 awarded to landlord; Unpaid Water And Electricity Rates: $1,337.76 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5022040?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5022040?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11305092-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat Unit G04, 28C Eileen Newey Place, Henderson, Tenancy Tribunal Case 5022040 — Property damage

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5022040 — net $2,110.26 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 20 September 2024	$1,036.70	Rent arrears to 20 September 2024
Unpaid water and electricity rates	$1,337.76	Unpaid water and electricity rates
Carpet Cleaning	$448.50	Carpet Cleaning
Cleaning	$345.00	Cleaning
Lock/key replacement	$247.28	Lock/key replacement
Replacement of door handle	$281.75	Replacement of door handle
Repairs of damaged bedroom wall	$271.87	Repairs of damaged bedroom wall
Electrical fittings replacement/repair: Cooktop	$245.30	Electrical fittings replacement/repair: Cooktop
Repairs to damaged bathroom door frame	$69.10	Repairs to damaged bathroom door frame
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,110.26
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,110.26

Shanika Makayla tinysha Manuel Le-Gros and Raymond Johnathan lee mori Gregory must pay Staircase Property Management Limited As Agent For Christopher & Melissa Atkins $2,110.26 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,200.00 (6498015-012) to Staircase Property Management Limited As Agent For Christopher & Melissa Atkins immediately.

Reasons

Ms Donavan of Staircase Property Management Limited attended the hearing for the landlord. The tenant did not attend the hearing. The tenant has not communicated with the Tribunal as to why they would not attend the hearing. The hearing proceeded in the tenant’s absence.

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

How much is owed for rent, and outgoings?

The tenancy ended on 20 September 2024. The landlord provided rent records in the form of a rent ledger showing the vacated rent arrears.

The landlord also provided invoices showing sum owing in unpaid water and electricity rates.

These claims are proved and the amounts ordered are inclusive of GST.

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) provides that 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. Section 40(1)(ca) of the RTA provides the tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.

The landlord has provided a pre-tenancy inspection report showing the state of the premises at the start of the tenancy and an exit reporting showing that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.

At the hearing, Ms Donavan advised that the premises were brand new at the start of the tenancy. Ms Donavan said that when she entered the premises at the end of the tenancy there was a strong smell of urine which she believes was from a dog the tenant had at the premises. Ms Donavan arranged for the carpets to be cleaned at a cost of $224.25 (including GST).

A new tenant moved in shortly after this and complained that there was still a strong smell of urine in two of the rooms. Ms Donavan arranged for a further clean of these rooms at a further cost of $224.25 (including GST).

I accept Ms Donavan’s evidence that there was a strong smell of urine in the carpets at the end of the tenancy.

The landlord provided an invoice for cleaning the premises of $345.00 (including GST). The invoice provides that $150.00 of this invoice was general cleaning of the apartment and the remainder was cleaning of fly faeces from the walls and ceiling.

The tenant did not return the keys to the mailbox and to the door to the floor of the apartment. The landlord has provided invoices showing that these locks and keys were replaced.

These claims are proved and the amounts ordered are inclusive of GST.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B of the RTA provides that 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.

Section 49B(3)(a) of the RTA provides that 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).

Section 49B(3)(b) of the RTA provides that 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). Section 49B(3A)(a) of the RTA provides that where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage.

Section 49B(1) of the RTA provides that 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.

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 has claimed for the following damage which it says was caused during the tenancy: replacement of a missing range slider door handle; repairs to damaged bedroom wall; repairs to damaged bathroom door frame; and a replacement cooktop.

Ms Donavan advised that the landlord’s insurance excess was $2,000.00.

The landlord has provided photographs from the start of the tenancy and at the end of the tenancy showing that the damage was caused during the tenancy. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The amounts ordered are proved and are inclusive of GST. Filing fee:

Staircase Property Management Limited As Agent For Christopher & Melissa Atkins has wholly succeeded with the claim. For this reason, I must order reimbursement of the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5022040 — net $2,110.26 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 20 September 2024	$1,036.70	Rent arrears to 20 September 2024
Unpaid water and electricity rates	$1,337.76	Unpaid water and electricity rates
Carpet Cleaning	$448.50	Carpet Cleaning
Cleaning	$345.00	Cleaning
Lock/key replacement	$247.28	Lock/key replacement
Replacement of door handle	$281.75	Replacement of door handle
Repairs of damaged bedroom wall	$271.87	Repairs of damaged bedroom wall
Electrical fittings replacement/repair: Cooktop	$245.30	Electrical fittings replacement/repair: Cooktop
Repairs to damaged bathroom door frame	$69.10	Repairs to damaged bathroom door frame
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,110.26
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,110.26

Order

Shanika Makayla tinysha Manuel Le-Gros and Raymond Johnathan lee mori Gregory must pay Staircase Property Management Limited As Agent For Christopher & Melissa Atkins $2,110.26 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,200.00 (6498015-012) to Staircase Property Management Limited As Agent For Christopher & Melissa Atkins immediately.

Reasons

Ms Donavan of Staircase Property Management Limited attended the hearing for the landlord. The tenant did not attend the hearing. The tenant has not communicated with the Tribunal as to why they would not attend the hearing. The hearing proceeded in the tenant’s absence.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent, and outgoings?

The tenancy ended on 20 September 2024. The landlord provided rent records in the form of a rent ledger showing the vacated rent arrears.
The landlord also provided invoices showing sum owing in unpaid water and electricity rates.
These claims are proved and the amounts ordered are inclusive of GST.

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) provides that 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. Section 40(1)(ca) of the RTA provides the tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The landlord has provided a pre-tenancy inspection report showing the state of the premises at the start of the tenancy and an exit reporting showing that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
At the hearing, Ms Donavan advised that the premises were brand new at the start of the tenancy. Ms Donavan said that when she entered the premises at the end of the tenancy there was a strong smell of urine which she believes was from a dog the tenant had at the premises. Ms Donavan arranged for the carpets to be cleaned at a cost of $224.25 (including GST).
A new tenant moved in shortly after this and complained that there was still a strong smell of urine in two of the rooms. Ms Donavan arranged for a further clean of these rooms at a further cost of $224.25 (including GST).
I accept Ms Donavan’s evidence that there was a strong smell of urine in the carpets at the end of the tenancy.
The landlord provided an invoice for cleaning the premises of $345.00 (including GST). The invoice provides that $150.00 of this invoice was general cleaning of the apartment and the remainder was cleaning of fly faeces from the walls and ceiling.
The tenant did not return the keys to the mailbox and to the door to the floor of the apartment. The landlord has provided invoices showing that these locks and keys were replaced.
These claims are proved and the amounts ordered are inclusive of GST.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B of the RTA provides that 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.
Section 49B(3)(a) of the RTA provides that 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).
Section 49B(3)(b) of the RTA provides that 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). Section 49B(3A)(a) of the RTA provides that where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage.
Section 49B(1) of the RTA provides that 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.
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 has claimed for the following damage which it says was caused during the tenancy: replacement of a missing range slider door handle; repairs to damaged bedroom wall; repairs to damaged bathroom door frame; and a replacement cooktop.
Ms Donavan advised that the landlord’s insurance excess was $2,000.00.
The landlord has provided photographs from the start of the tenancy and at the end of the tenancy showing that the damage was caused during the tenancy. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved and are inclusive of GST. Filing fee:
Staircase Property Management Limited As Agent For Christopher & Melissa Atkins has wholly succeeded with the claim. For this reason, I must order reimbursement of the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5022040 — Property damage at Unit/Flat Unit G04, 28C Eileen Newey Place, Henderson,

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5022040 — Property damage at Unit/Flat Unit G04, 28C Eileen Newey Place, Henderson,

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent, and outgoings?

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, and outgoings?

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