What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5117391?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5117391?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5117391?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5117391?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11722649-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5117391?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5117391?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5117391?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5117391?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11722649-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

56 Awanui Drive, Waikanae, Waikanae 5036 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5117391 — Cleanliness

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing by video. The landlord’s agent and the landlord attended the hearing together with the tenant.

The landlord applied for compensation for damage to the oven at the premises. The landlord claimed insurance for the damage and is seeking $1,000.00 for the insurance excess.

The question to consider is whether the damage to the oven was caused by this tenant during this tenancy.

The tenancy lasted for just over seven months from 22 March 2024 until 1 November 2024.

The damage to the oven was caused by an oven tray covered in tin foil which sat on the floor of the oven. The landlord obtained an opinion from GAR Kapiti Limited, a local company servicing domestic appliances, which confirmed the cause of the damage and that it was irreparable.

The landlord produced two photographs of the damage both to the oven tray and the bottom of the oven. Just prior to the hearing the landlord produced a photograph of the oven taken on 21` March 2024, the day before the tenancy commenced. That photograph shows that there is a tin foil covered oven tray sitting on the bottom of the oven.

The agent said that at the end of the previous tenancy she took the tray out of the oven to inspect the bottom of the oven, noticed no damage, then returned the tray to the bottom of the oven. The previous tenancy lasted for three years and three months from December 2021 until March 2024.

The tenant’s evidence is that when she moved into the tenancy, she noticed the tin foil on the bottom of the oven. She did not notice that it covered a baking tray. The tenant said that she did not often use the oven and only noticed the tin foil covered oven tray when she was cleaning the premises prior to the tenancy ending. At that time, she replaced the tin foil for the first time. She said that she did not notice any damage to the oven.

On the evidence it is not clear that this tenant caused the damage. There is no evidence to establish that the oven was free of damage when this tenancy commenced and even if there was there is evidence that the previous tenant likely used the oven with the tin foil lined tray at the bottom of the oven. Further, when this tenancy commenced the oven tray was already sitting on the bottom of the oven, as that is where it was returned by the landlord’s agent.

It is possible that the damage was caused by a gradual deterioration, but there is no evidence to establish this or that the damage was only caused during this tenancy. Both this tenant and the previous tenant may have contributed to the damage and therefore it is not possible to attribute the damage solely to this tenant.

The applicant has not satisfied me that it is more likely than not that this tenant was solely responsible for the damage to the oven.

The landlord’s application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing by video. The landlord’s agent and the landlord attended the hearing together with the tenant.

The landlord applied for compensation for damage to the oven at the premises. The landlord claimed insurance for the damage and is seeking $1,000.00 for the insurance excess.

The question to consider is whether the damage to the oven was caused by this tenant during this tenancy.

The tenancy lasted for just over seven months from 22 March 2024 until 1 November 2024.

The applicant has not satisfied me that it is more likely than not that this tenant was solely responsible for the damage to the oven.

The landlord’s application is dismissed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5117391 — Cleanliness at 56 Awanui Drive, Waikanae, Waikanae 5036

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5117391 — Cleanliness at 56 Awanui Drive, Waikanae, Waikanae 5036

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions