What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5045929?

The tribunal order states: Kingston Joseph and Anuradhika Piyarathna to pay Edgecom Limited $83.16

How much money was awarded in case 5045929?

Water Rates: $83.16 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5045929?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5045929?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11414755-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5045929?

The tribunal order states: Kingston Joseph and Anuradhika Piyarathna to pay Edgecom Limited $83.16

How much money was awarded in case 5045929?

Water Rates: $83.16 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5045929?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5045929?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11414755-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 3, 16 Marriott Road, Pakuranga, Auckland 2010 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5045929 — Tenancy dispute

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5045929 — net $83.16 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Water rates	$83.16	Water rates
Net award	$83.16
Bond	$1,080.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$83.16

Order

Kingston Joseph and Anuradhika Piyarathna to pay Edgecom Limited $83.16 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,080.00 (3225008-005) immediately apportioned as follows: Edgecom Limited: $83.16 Kingston Joseph and Anuradhika Piyarathna: $996.84
The claim for outstanding water charges is allowed.
The landlord’s claim for damage compensation is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing via remote teleconference.
The landlord has applied for water arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for water rates?

The tenancy ended on 27 October 2024. The landlord provided evidence of outstanding water charges which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy. Having sighted this evidence I am satisfied that the tenant is responsible for this debt.
The claim for outstanding water charges is proven.

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 claims that the tenant damaged the walls and doors. She says that the walls had numerous scribble marks on them. She said that tenants tried to brush over the walls with paint to repair it. The scribble marks were not evident from the photographs provided.
The premises are a 1980’s brick and tile unit. The tenants have resided in the property since July 2012. The landlord says that she is only claiming for damage to the lounge walls. The landlord provided a selection of photos from the start of the tenancy and photographic evidence of the alleged damage. One can see from the photographs that the tenant has tried to ‘repair’ the damage by painting over it.
No insurance was claimed for this alleged damage. The landlord claims the amount of $1713.83. No invoice has been provided in support of this. The landlord stated during the hearing that she is prepared to consider the amount of $1000.00 in order to settle the issue. The tenant does not accept this claim.
The problem for the landlord is that she has not paid for the damage to be repaired. They still owe money for the repairs and cannot provide a paid expense claim in support of this claim.
As part of her application she provided two quotes for professional painting.
The landlord claims that this is intentional damage. This tenancy began more than 12 years ago. The tenants have lived there all this time with their two young children. It is not uncommon in most households for young children to draw on walls. That said, a landlord should not be in a better position after a claim in the Tribunal, then the landlord would have been if the damage had not occurred.
The Tribunal will sometimes accept quotes for any claimed loss instead of invoices and receipts, such as window glass replacement.
In this case I am not prepared to accept quotes in support of a claim for compensation for such a large amount. The landlord needed to have provided an invoice from a professional painter confirming that the amount claimed had in fact been paid. Without this I am not prepared to allow the landlord’s claim for damage compensation.
The claim for damage compensation is dismissed.
Because the landlord has not been wholly or substantially successful I do not reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5045929 — net $83.16 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Water rates	$83.16	Water rates
Net award	$83.16
Bond	$1,080.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$83.16

Order

Kingston Joseph and Anuradhika Piyarathna to pay Edgecom Limited $83.16 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,080.00 (3225008-005) immediately apportioned as follows: Edgecom Limited: $83.16 Kingston Joseph and Anuradhika Piyarathna: $996.84
The claim for outstanding water charges is allowed.
The landlord’s claim for damage compensation is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing via remote teleconference.
The landlord has applied for water arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for water rates?

The tenancy ended on 27 October 2024. The landlord provided evidence of outstanding water charges which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy. Having sighted this evidence I am satisfied that the tenant is responsible for this debt.
The claim for outstanding water charges is proven.

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 claims that the tenant damaged the walls and doors. She says that the walls had numerous scribble marks on them. She said that tenants tried to brush over the walls with paint to repair it. The scribble marks were not evident from the photographs provided.
The premises are a 1980’s brick and tile unit. The tenants have resided in the property since July 2012. The landlord says that she is only claiming for damage to the lounge walls. The landlord provided a selection of photos from the start of the tenancy and photographic evidence of the alleged damage. One can see from the photographs that the tenant has tried to ‘repair’ the damage by painting over it.
No insurance was claimed for this alleged damage. The landlord claims the amount of $1713.83. No invoice has been provided in support of this. The landlord stated during the hearing that she is prepared to consider the amount of $1000.00 in order to settle the issue. The tenant does not accept this claim.
The problem for the landlord is that she has not paid for the damage to be repaired. They still owe money for the repairs and cannot provide a paid expense claim in support of this claim.
As part of her application she provided two quotes for professional painting.
The landlord claims that this is intentional damage. This tenancy began more than 12 years ago. The tenants have lived there all this time with their two young children. It is not uncommon in most households for young children to draw on walls. That said, a landlord should not be in a better position after a claim in the Tribunal, then the landlord would have been if the damage had not occurred.
The Tribunal will sometimes accept quotes for any claimed loss instead of invoices and receipts, such as window glass replacement.
In this case I am not prepared to accept quotes in support of a claim for compensation for such a large amount. The landlord needed to have provided an invoice from a professional painter confirming that the amount claimed had in fact been paid. Without this I am not prepared to allow the landlord’s claim for damage compensation.
The claim for damage compensation is dismissed.
Because the landlord has not been wholly or substantially successful I do not reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5045929 — Tenancy dispute at Unit/Flat 3, 16 Marriott Road, Pakuranga, Auckland 2010

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5045929 — Tenancy dispute at Unit/Flat 3, 16 Marriott Road, Pakuranga, Auckland 2010

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for water rates?

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

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for water rates?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions