What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5159038?

The tribunal order states: Toe Sega must pay Dhirendra Singh as agent for Nalini Singh $7,512.96

How much money was awarded in case 5159038?

Cleaning: $586.50 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $402.50 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $2,500.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $150.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,085.71 awarded to landlord; Walls and Doors: $1,250.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $450.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $61.25 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5159038?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Rent arrears, Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5159038?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11983458-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5159038?

The tribunal order states: Toe Sega must pay Dhirendra Singh as agent for Nalini Singh $7,512.96

How much money was awarded in case 5159038?

Cleaning: $586.50 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $402.50 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $2,500.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $150.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,085.71 awarded to landlord; Walls and Doors: $1,250.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $450.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $61.25 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5159038?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Rent arrears, Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5159038?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11983458-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

17 Aumarire Lane, Favona, Auckland 2024 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5159038 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5159038 — net $7,512.96 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$2,085.71	Rent arrears
Carpet Cleaning	$586.50	Carpet Cleaning
Carpet replacement	$2,500.00	Carpet replacement
Lock/key replacement	$150.00	Lock/key replacement
Cleaning	$402.50	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$450.00	Rubbish removal
Water rates	$61.25	Water rates
Repairs: Walls and doors (50	$1,250.00	Repairs: Walls and doors (50
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$7,512.96
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$7,512.96

The agent for the landlord attended. There was no appearance by the tenant.

The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. There was some confusion in the claims as they comingled previous awards and agent costs. The preliminary stage of the hearing removed those and confirmed the new claims as sought.

As with any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations. That means that it is for the party bringing the application to establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities.” That means that in this case, the tenant must establish that what they are claiming is more likely than not.

The term “balance of probabilities” means more likely than unlikely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is more likely. I do not need to be completely certain, but I need to be more certain than uncertain. In deciding any claim, I must consider all the evidence presented (including oral evidence during the hearing). I must weigh this evidence to decide what is more likely. It is not a question of a party not being “right” or not telling the truth, the sole issue is whether they have on the evidence presented, proven that their claim is more likely than not.

A prior order, under tenant name redaction, has been made regarding this tenancy. That is under enforcement and not included in this order.

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

The tenancy ended on 8 January 2025. The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amounts owing at the end of the tenancy are as ordered. Both amounts are totals since the sums established and ordered previously.

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 tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. The landlord has established the need for cleaning, carpet cleaning and rubbish removal and supported the loss via invoices of the same amounts.

The owner is pursuing this application. The previous application was via the property manager. The agent has since ended the arrangement and not provided photographic evidence to the owner, despite a number of requests to do so.

I have relied on the photographs and invoices as provided. In some instances, these have also indirectly established other damage as more than likely.

The tenant did not return the keys. A locksmith cost of $150.00 was established by invoice.

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 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 following damage was caused during the tenancy: Carpet

The carpet was badly stained throughout over time. This premises was one year old when the tenancy commenced. The owner lived there previously. An attempt at a deep clean of the carpets was unsuccessful.

The carpet was replaced at a cost of $2,500.00. This cost was established by an invoice and evidenced by the photos. The owner only replaced the carpet layer and retained the underlay. Walls and doors

The landlord provided an invoice for $2,500.00, being the cost of repair and repainting multiple walls and doors after damage to them. There has been less evidence of this damage but I accept it proven that significant damage did take place. I have determined tenant liability at $1,250.00 for the repairs and limited painting. Given the premises was to be sold, I have allowed for some consideration of this in the decision to paint throughout, adjusting the award accordingly.

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

The amounts ordered are proved.

I have considered betterment and depreciation. The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached their obligations, and should not be better or worse off. In not applying depreciation, I have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan as well as the lower cost approach to repair adopted by the owner. Filing fee

Because Dhirendra Singh as agent for Nalini Singh has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5159038 — net $7,512.96 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$2,085.71	Rent arrears
Carpet Cleaning	$586.50	Carpet Cleaning
Carpet replacement	$2,500.00	Carpet replacement
Lock/key replacement	$150.00	Lock/key replacement
Cleaning	$402.50	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$450.00	Rubbish removal
Water rates	$61.25	Water rates
Repairs: Walls and doors (50	$1,250.00	Repairs: Walls and doors (50
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$7,512.96
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$7,512.96

The agent for the landlord attended. There was no appearance by the tenant.

A prior order, under tenant name redaction, has been made regarding this tenancy. That is under enforcement and not included in this order.

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

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

I have relied on the photographs and invoices as provided. In some instances, these have also indirectly established other damage as more than likely.

The tenant did not return the keys. A locksmith cost of $150.00 was established by invoice.

The amounts ordered are proved.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The following damage was caused during the tenancy: Carpet

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

The amounts ordered are proved.

Because Dhirendra Singh as agent for Nalini Singh has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5159038 — Property damage at 17 Aumarire Lane, Favona, Auckland 2024

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5159038 — Property damage at 17 Aumarire Lane, Favona, Auckland 2024

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

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

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

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

Frequently asked questions