What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5151371?

The tribunal order states: Camille Claudel Nortje must pay F H Trustee Company Limited and Elizabeth

How much money was awarded in case 5151371?

Cleaning: $276.00 awarded to landlord; Electricity And Data: $448.22 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,857.14 awarded to landlord; Water: $80.41 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5151371?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5151371?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11584020-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5151371?

The tribunal order states: Camille Claudel Nortje must pay F H Trustee Company Limited and Elizabeth

How much money was awarded in case 5151371?

Cleaning: $276.00 awarded to landlord; Electricity And Data: $448.22 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,857.14 awarded to landlord; Water: $80.41 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5151371?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5151371?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11584020-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat G1, 5 Howe Street, Freemans Bay, Auckland Tenancy Tribunal Case 5151371 — Rent arrears

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5151371 — net $3,688.77 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 11 February 2025	$2,857.14	Rent arrears to 11 February 2025
Water	$80.41	Water
Electricity and data	$448.22	Electricity and data
Carpet Cleaning	$276.00	Carpet Cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,688.77
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,688.77

Both parties attended the hearing. The landlord was represented by Ms Jones.

The tenant had requested that the hearing be adjourned for health reasons. The request was declined but the tenant was given leave to appear by teleconference, which she did.

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

On the morning of the hearing the tenant filed a statement which contained allegations that the landlord had breached her obligations and committed unlawful acts. The landlord had not received that statement before the hearing.

The possibility was discussed of hearing the tenant’s claims, so that all issues between the parties could be determined today. The tenant wants to bring further evidence in support of her claims. The landlord is entitled to better opportunity to consider and respond to the tenant’s claims. Accordingly, the tenant will need to follow the usual course and file an application in respect of those claims, which will be determined separately. There is no reason for the landlord’s claims not to be heard and determined today. How much is owed for rent and utilities.

The parties entered into a fixed term tenancy for a term from 14 December 2024 to 13 December 2025.

There is a dispute about how the tenancy was ended. However, it is clear that the tenancy has in fact come to an end. Other tenants moved into the premises on 13 February 2025.

The landlord claims rent to the day the tenant vacated. Without prejudice to any other claims the tenant might want to bring, she is obliged to pay rent at least while she was occupying the premises.

The landlord’s evidence is that the tenant vacated on 12 February 2025. The tenant says she believes she left a couple of days earlier, on 10 February, a day after she says she was assaulted by the landlord. The tenant has provided a police complaint form in respect of that incident, dated 9 February 2025.

The landlord’s recollection is to some degree corroborated by a photograph forwarded on to the landlord on 12 February showing a van parked outside the premises with the message, “She’s moving out”. I find that to be the best evidence of the date the tenant vacated. Clearly though, the tenant did not have use of the premises for the whole of that day. The landlord had carpet cleaners working in the premises on the 12 th . I find that the tenant should pay rent to 11 February 2025.

The landlord has provided water invoices from the Body Corporate for periods during the tenancy. Those invoices include fixed daily supply charges which the landlord is not entitled to recover from the tenant (see s.39 RTA). The tenant accepts that she is responsible for the consumption charges recorded in those invoices.

Though not her usual practice, Ms Jones opened a Mercury energy account for the supply of electricity and data to the premises. The tenant accepts that she is liable for those charges as shown by the invoices provided.

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 agreement provides that, “the number of pets is – 2 small dogs” and “carpets to be cleaned at the end of the tenancy. Any damage caused by dogs to be rectified prior to the end of the tenancy.” The agreement also records that “Carpet was cleaned twice and large stains removed prior to tenancy. Some small stains remain”.

The landlord says that when she came to the premises to do an inspection, which she was not able to carry out, there was a noticeable smell of pet urine. She says that odour remained at the end of the tenancy so she had to urgently get the carpets commercially cleaned so the new tenants could move in.

The tenant says that there were existing odours when she moved in and she was not there long enough for her dogs to have caused the need for the carpets to be cleaned.

A tenant’s obligation is to keep the premises reasonably clean and tidy and return the premises to the landlord in that condition. A provision in a tenancy agreement putting a greater obligation on the tenant, is not enforceable (see s.11 RTA).

The landlord’s evidence is that the odours present at the start of the tenancy were found to be from some meat that had inadvertently been left for the prior tenant. With that evidence and particularly having regard to the landlord’s direct evidence that there were pet odours represent at the end of the tenancy that needed to be removed before a new tenancy could start, I find it proved on balance that the premises were not left by the tenant in a reasonable condition. She should compensate the landlord fort the cost of having the carpets commercially cleaned. That cost is proved by the invoice provided.

Because the landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

The tenant seeks suppression but as the landlord’s claims have largely been proven, the grounds in s.95A are not satisfied.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5151371 — net $3,688.77 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 11 February 2025	$2,857.14	Rent arrears to 11 February 2025
Water	$80.41	Water
Electricity and data	$448.22	Electricity and data
Carpet Cleaning	$276.00	Carpet Cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,688.77
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,688.77

Order

Camille Claudel Nortje must pay F H Trustee Company Limited and Elizabeth Ann Jones as Trustees for Liz Jones Family Trust $3,688.77 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The landlord was represented by Ms Jones.
The tenant had requested that the hearing be adjourned for health reasons. The request was declined but the tenant was given leave to appear by teleconference, which she did.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
On the morning of the hearing the tenant filed a statement which contained allegations that the landlord had breached her obligations and committed unlawful acts. The landlord had not received that statement before the hearing.
The possibility was discussed of hearing the tenant’s claims, so that all issues between the parties could be determined today. The tenant wants to bring further evidence in support of her claims. The landlord is entitled to better opportunity to consider and respond to the tenant’s claims. Accordingly, the tenant will need to follow the usual course and file an application in respect of those claims, which will be determined separately. There is no reason for the landlord’s claims not to be heard and determined today. How much is owed for rent and utilities.
The parties entered into a fixed term tenancy for a term from 14 December 2024 to 13 December 2025.
There is a dispute about how the tenancy was ended. However, it is clear that the tenancy has in fact come to an end. Other tenants moved into the premises on 13 February 2025.
The landlord claims rent to the day the tenant vacated. Without prejudice to any other claims the tenant might want to bring, she is obliged to pay rent at least while she was occupying the premises.
The landlord’s evidence is that the tenant vacated on 12 February 2025. The tenant says she believes she left a couple of days earlier, on 10 February, a day after she says she was assaulted by the landlord. The tenant has provided a police complaint form in respect of that incident, dated 9 February 2025.
The landlord’s recollection is to some degree corroborated by a photograph forwarded on to the landlord on 12 February showing a van parked outside the premises with the message, “She’s moving out”. I find that to be the best evidence of the date the tenant vacated. Clearly though, the tenant did not have use of the premises for the whole of that day. The landlord had carpet cleaners working in the premises on the 12 th . I find that the tenant should pay rent to 11 February 2025.
The landlord has provided water invoices from the Body Corporate for periods during the tenancy. Those invoices include fixed daily supply charges which the landlord is not entitled to recover from the tenant (see s.39 RTA). The tenant accepts that she is responsible for the consumption charges recorded in those invoices.
Though not her usual practice, Ms Jones opened a Mercury energy account for the supply of electricity and data to the premises. The tenant accepts that she is liable for those charges as shown by the invoices provided.

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 agreement provides that, “the number of pets is – 2 small dogs” and “carpets to be cleaned at the end of the tenancy. Any damage caused by dogs to be rectified prior to the end of the tenancy.” The agreement also records that “Carpet was cleaned twice and large stains removed prior to tenancy. Some small stains remain”.
The landlord says that when she came to the premises to do an inspection, which she was not able to carry out, there was a noticeable smell of pet urine. She says that odour remained at the end of the tenancy so she had to urgently get the carpets commercially cleaned so the new tenants could move in.
The tenant says that there were existing odours when she moved in and she was not there long enough for her dogs to have caused the need for the carpets to be cleaned.
A tenant’s obligation is to keep the premises reasonably clean and tidy and return the premises to the landlord in that condition. A provision in a tenancy agreement putting a greater obligation on the tenant, is not enforceable (see s.11 RTA).
The landlord’s evidence is that the odours present at the start of the tenancy were found to be from some meat that had inadvertently been left for the prior tenant. With that evidence and particularly having regard to the landlord’s direct evidence that there were pet odours represent at the end of the tenancy that needed to be removed before a new tenancy could start, I find it proved on balance that the premises were not left by the tenant in a reasonable condition. She should compensate the landlord fort the cost of having the carpets commercially cleaned. That cost is proved by the invoice provided.
Because the landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
The tenant seeks suppression but as the landlord’s claims have largely been proven, the grounds in s.95A are not satisfied.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5151371 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat G1, 5 Howe Street, Freemans Bay, Auckland

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5151371 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat G1, 5 Howe Street, Freemans Bay, Auckland

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

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?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions