What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5042989?

The tribunal order states: Manaia Kowai Maru must pay Team Chb Limited As Agent For Carel Lampe

How much money was awarded in case 5042989?

Cleaning: $1,506.50 awarded to landlord; Compensation: $1,080.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $109.25 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $127.50 awarded to landlord; Bedrooms: $1,547.91 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $2,695.32 awarded to landlord; Window Frames And Latches: $313.26 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,633.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5042989?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5042989?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11046134-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5042989?

The tribunal order states: Manaia Kowai Maru must pay Team Chb Limited As Agent For Carel Lampe

How much money was awarded in case 5042989?

Cleaning: $1,506.50 awarded to landlord; Compensation: $1,080.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $109.25 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $127.50 awarded to landlord; Bedrooms: $1,547.91 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $2,695.32 awarded to landlord; Window Frames And Latches: $313.26 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,633.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5042989?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5042989?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11046134-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

4A Swinburn Street, Dannevirke, Dannevirke 4930 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5042989 — Property damage

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5042989 — net $9,039.74 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Lock/key replacement	$127.50	Lock/key replacement
Cleaning	$1,506.50	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$1,633.00	Rubbish removal
Lawns and Garden work	$109.25	Lawns and Garden work
Repairs: window frames and latches	$313.26	Repairs: window frames and latches
Repairs: lounge damage	$2,695.32	Repairs: lounge damage
Repairs: bedrooms	$1,547.91	Repairs: bedrooms
Compensation for rent	$1,080.00	Compensation for rent
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$9,039.74
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$9,039.74

Manaia Kowai Maru must pay Team Chb Limited As Agent For Carel Lampe $9,039.74 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.

Team Chb Limited As Agent For Carel Lampe must take any of the tenant’s personal documents that have been left at the premises to the nearest Police station and obtain a receipt for them.

The landlord may dispose of the other goods left at the premises by the tenant as the landlord sees fit. DescriptionLandlord Lock/key replacement$127.50 Cleaning$1,506.50 Rubbish removal$1,633.00 Lawns and Garden work$109.25 Repairs: window frames and latches$313.26 Repairs: lounge damage$2,695.32 Repairs: bedrooms$1,547.91 Compensation for rent$1,080.00 Filing fee reimbursement$27.00 Total award$9,039.74 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$9,039.74

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing.

The tenant did not attend the hearing.

The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

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 provided photographic evidence that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. The Tribunal has made an order that the property was abandoned. It appeared from the photographs that the tenant had taken what she wanted and walked out without making any attempt to dispose of her possessions and rubbish or to clean the property.

The amounts ordered are 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 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: a. The lock to a sliding door was removed. b. A number of window latches were broken. c. There were numerous holes of various sizes in the walls and doors of two bedrooms and the lounge.

The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

Because of the nature and extent of the damage and the fact it occurred over a short period towards the end of the tenancy, the landlord has persuaded the Tribunal on the evidence before it and on the balance of probabilities that the damage was caused intentionally.

The amounts ordered are proved.

The landlord has claimed compensation for the period during which the repairs were completed and the property could not be rented. The period claimed was from 20 August 2024 to 18 October 2024.

A landlord can be expected to have a period of vacancy between tenancies where no rent is earned. However, it is appropriate for a tenant to compensate a landlord where they have left the property in such a state that it could not be let out and it takes a longer period for the landlord to get the property up to the necessary standard. Such loss is reasonably foreseeable where a tenant walks away from a property leaving it in a filthy state, burdened with a substantial amount of rubbish and requiring significant repairs.

The landlord has persuaded the Tribunal that in this particular case, it is appropriate to award compensation for the delay caused by the tenant’s failure to clear and clean the property. A sum of four weeks’ rental at the rate provided under the tenancy is appropriate.

The landlord has applied for the disposal of goods the tenant left at the premises at the end of the tenancy.

The landlord is unable to contact the tenant as the tenant abandoned the tenancy.

It is not practicable for the landlord to the return the goods to the tenant. The value of the goods is below the cost of storing, transporting and selling them. Therefore the landlord may dispose of the goods. See sections 62(3)(b), 62B(2) and (3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Because Team Chb Limited As Agent For Carel Lampe has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5042989 — net $9,039.74 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Lock/key replacement	$127.50	Lock/key replacement
Cleaning	$1,506.50	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$1,633.00	Rubbish removal
Lawns and Garden work	$109.25	Lawns and Garden work
Repairs: window frames and latches	$313.26	Repairs: window frames and latches
Repairs: lounge damage	$2,695.32	Repairs: lounge damage
Repairs: bedrooms	$1,547.91	Repairs: bedrooms
Compensation for rent	$1,080.00	Compensation for rent
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$9,039.74
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$9,039.74

Order

Manaia Kowai Maru must pay Team Chb Limited As Agent For Carel Lampe $9,039.74 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
Team Chb Limited As Agent For Carel Lampe must take any of the tenant’s personal documents that have been left at the premises to the nearest Police station and obtain a receipt for them.
The landlord may dispose of the other goods left at the premises by the tenant as the landlord sees fit. DescriptionLandlord Lock/key replacement$127.50 Cleaning$1,506.50 Rubbish removal$1,633.00 Lawns and Garden work$109.25 Repairs: window frames and latches$313.26 Repairs: lounge damage$2,695.32 Repairs: bedrooms$1,547.91 Compensation for rent$1,080.00 Filing fee reimbursement$27.00 Total award$9,039.74 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$9,039.74

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing.
The tenant did not attend the hearing.
The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

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 provided photographic evidence that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. The Tribunal has made an order that the property was abandoned. It appeared from the photographs that the tenant had taken what she wanted and walked out without making any attempt to dispose of her possessions and rubbish or to clean the property.
The amounts ordered are 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 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: a. The lock to a sliding door was removed. b. A number of window latches were broken. c. There were numerous holes of various sizes in the walls and doors of two bedrooms and the lounge.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
Because of the nature and extent of the damage and the fact it occurred over a short period towards the end of the tenancy, the landlord has persuaded the Tribunal on the evidence before it and on the balance of probabilities that the damage was caused intentionally.
The amounts ordered are proved.
The landlord has claimed compensation for the period during which the repairs were completed and the property could not be rented. The period claimed was from 20 August 2024 to 18 October 2024.
A landlord can be expected to have a period of vacancy between tenancies where no rent is earned. However, it is appropriate for a tenant to compensate a landlord where they have left the property in such a state that it could not be let out and it takes a longer period for the landlord to get the property up to the necessary standard. Such loss is reasonably foreseeable where a tenant walks away from a property leaving it in a filthy state, burdened with a substantial amount of rubbish and requiring significant repairs.
The landlord has persuaded the Tribunal that in this particular case, it is appropriate to award compensation for the delay caused by the tenant’s failure to clear and clean the property. A sum of four weeks’ rental at the rate provided under the tenancy is appropriate.
The landlord has applied for the disposal of goods the tenant left at the premises at the end of the tenancy.
The landlord is unable to contact the tenant as the tenant abandoned the tenancy.
It is not practicable for the landlord to the return the goods to the tenant. The value of the goods is below the cost of storing, transporting and selling them. Therefore the landlord may dispose of the goods. See sections 62(3)(b), 62B(2) and (3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Because Team Chb Limited As Agent For Carel Lampe has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5042989 — Property damage at 4A Swinburn Street, Dannevirke, Dannevirke 4930

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5042989 — Property damage at 4A Swinburn Street, Dannevirke, Dannevirke 4930

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

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