What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5103511?

The tribunal order states: Samuel James Francis Fletcher must pay Team Group Rentals Limited As

How much money was awarded in case 5103511?

Cleaning: $850.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 5103511 D…: $1,421.29 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,283.32 awarded to landlord; Painting 2 Walls: $600.00 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: heat pump remot…: $159.85 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $811.51 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5103511?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5103511?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11852185-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5103511?

The tribunal order states: Samuel James Francis Fletcher must pay Team Group Rentals Limited As

How much money was awarded in case 5103511?

Cleaning: $850.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 5103511 D…: $1,421.29 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,283.32 awarded to landlord; Painting 2 Walls: $600.00 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: heat pump remot…: $159.85 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $811.51 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5103511?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5103511?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11852185-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

10 Highfield Place, Levin, Levin 5510 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5103511 — Property damage

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5103511 — net $5,125.97 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Previous order application 5103511 dated 24/02/2025	$1,421.29	Previous order application 5103511 dated 24/02/2025
Replace furnishings: heat pump remote	$159.85	Replace furnishings: heat pump remote
Cleaning	$850.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal: and lawn mow	$811.51	Rubbish removal: and lawn mow
Window repairs (5	$1,283.32	Window repairs (5
Repairs: painting 2 walls	$600.00	Repairs: painting 2 walls
Net award	$5,125.97
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,125.97

The landlord attended the hearing represented by Ms Gough.

Mr Fletcher did not attend the hearing and did not answer the calls made to his phone (number ending 0402) during the hearing. He had been notified of the hearing by email and text, accordingly pursuant to section 92 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) the hearing continued in his absence.

The landlord’s claims were first heard on 24 February 2025. At that time only the claim for rent arrears had been served on the tenant. Accordingly, an order for rent arrears was made and the claims for compensation were adjourned to a further hearing to ensure the tenant had been adequately notified. He now has been.

The initial order for rent arrears is included in this one for debt recovery purposes.

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

The landlord seeks cleaning costs, rubbish removal costs and costs to mow the garden.

Pursuant to section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) of the RTA 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.

The landlord established in evidence tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. There was a significant amount of rubbish left including an old spa pool and building debris totalling two trailer loads. The property had not been cleaned at all and was filthy. The curtains also had to be washed as they smelt of smoke. It appeared that the tenant had smoked inside despite the agreement prohibiting such.

Some light bulbs were missing, and the heat pump needed to be replaced because one of the springs had been pulled out and it no longer worked. The landlord had not been notified of any issue with the remote.

The amounts ordered are proven in evidence and considered reasonable in the circumstances.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The landlord also seeks compensation for having to paint two walls that had been damaged by the tenant and replace 5 broken glass windows. The tenant had stuck mirror stickers on the wall in one bedroom and stickers on another bedroom wall which when removed, damaged the paint.

To be successful in such a claim, 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.

The landlord has established that the damage occurred during the tenancy, and I am satisfied it was all in excess of fair wear and tear. It would have been clear when applying these stickers to the walls that they could only be removed at cost to the paintwork. There was therefore an element of carelessness involved. The landlord has attempted to mitigate loss by only painting the two walls that were damaged and being careful to remove the stickers.

The number of windows broken also indicates a level of carelessness and one had been taped up and yet the landlord had not been notified.

Accordingly, I find the amounts ordered proven in evidence.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5103511 — net $5,125.97 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Previous order application 5103511 dated 24/02/2025	$1,421.29	Previous order application 5103511 dated 24/02/2025
Replace furnishings: heat pump remote	$159.85	Replace furnishings: heat pump remote
Cleaning	$850.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal: and lawn mow	$811.51	Rubbish removal: and lawn mow
Window repairs (5	$1,283.32	Window repairs (5
Repairs: painting 2 walls	$600.00	Repairs: painting 2 walls
Net award	$5,125.97
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,125.97

Order

Samuel James Francis Fletcher must pay Team Group Rentals Limited As Agent For Cathryn Swanson $5,125.97 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 24 February 2025 under the same proceedings.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing represented by Ms Gough.
Mr Fletcher did not attend the hearing and did not answer the calls made to his phone (number ending 0402) during the hearing. He had been notified of the hearing by email and text, accordingly pursuant to section 92 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) the hearing continued in his absence.
The landlord’s claims were first heard on 24 February 2025. At that time only the claim for rent arrears had been served on the tenant. Accordingly, an order for rent arrears was made and the claims for compensation were adjourned to a further hearing to ensure the tenant had been adequately notified. He now has been.
The initial order for rent arrears is included in this one for debt recovery purposes.

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

The landlord seeks cleaning costs, rubbish removal costs and costs to mow the garden.
Pursuant to section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) of the RTA 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.
The landlord established in evidence tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. There was a significant amount of rubbish left including an old spa pool and building debris totalling two trailer loads. The property had not been cleaned at all and was filthy. The curtains also had to be washed as they smelt of smoke. It appeared that the tenant had smoked inside despite the agreement prohibiting such.
Some light bulbs were missing, and the heat pump needed to be replaced because one of the springs had been pulled out and it no longer worked. The landlord had not been notified of any issue with the remote.
The amounts ordered are proven in evidence and considered reasonable in the circumstances.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The landlord also seeks compensation for having to paint two walls that had been damaged by the tenant and replace 5 broken glass windows. The tenant had stuck mirror stickers on the wall in one bedroom and stickers on another bedroom wall which when removed, damaged the paint.
To be successful in such a claim, 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.
The landlord has established that the damage occurred during the tenancy, and I am satisfied it was all in excess of fair wear and tear. It would have been clear when applying these stickers to the walls that they could only be removed at cost to the paintwork. There was therefore an element of carelessness involved. The landlord has attempted to mitigate loss by only painting the two walls that were damaged and being careful to remove the stickers.
The number of windows broken also indicates a level of carelessness and one had been taped up and yet the landlord had not been notified.
Accordingly, I find the amounts ordered proven in evidence.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5103511 — Property damage at 10 Highfield Place, Levin, Levin 5510

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5103511 — Property damage at 10 Highfield Place, Levin, Levin 5510

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