What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5167552?

The tribunal order states: Kirsty McWilliam (previously known as Kirsty Brown) to pay Harper Property

How much money was awarded in case 5167552?

Cleaning: $300.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Walls: $1,138.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5167552?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5167552?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11777569-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5167552?

The tribunal order states: Kirsty McWilliam (previously known as Kirsty Brown) to pay Harper Property

How much money was awarded in case 5167552?

Cleaning: $300.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Walls: $1,138.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5167552?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5167552?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11777569-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 1, 64 Hutchinson Avenue, New Lynn, Auckland Tenancy Tribunal Case 5167552 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Unit/Flat 1, 64 Hutchinson Avenue, New Lynn, Auckland Tenancy Tribunal Case 5167552 — Property damage | TenantCheck

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5167552 — net $1,665.50 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning	$200.00	Cleaning
Carpet Cleaning	$300.00	Carpet Cleaning
Repairs: Walls	$1,138.50	Repairs: Walls
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,665.50
Bond	$2,320.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,665.50

Claims and awards for application 5167552 — net $1,665.50 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Cleaning

Amount: $200.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning

Carpet Cleaning

Amount: $300.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Carpet Cleaning

Repairs: Walls

Amount: $1,138.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Walls

Filing fee reimbursement

Amount: $27.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Filing fee reimbursement

Net award

Landlord $1,665.50

Bond

Landlord $2,320.00

Total payable by Tenant to Landlord

Landlord $1,665.50

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Carpet Cleaning Cleanliness Filing Fee Property damage

Order

Kirsty McWilliam (previously known as Kirsty Brown) to pay Harper Property Management Limited, Ashwinkumar Patel, and Nehe Patel $1,665.50 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,320.00 (6129420-025 ) immediately apportioned as follows: Harper Property Management Limited acting agent for Ashwinkumar Patel, Nehe Patel : $1,665.50 Kirsty McWilliam: $654.50

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Ms White and Ms Stevenson represented the landlord.
The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

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

I am satisfied that the landlord has provided sufficient evidence (in particular photographic evidence) to establish that the oven and blinds at the premises were not left reasonably clean as required by section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act). I am also satisfied that the landlord has established that the carpets required cleaning due to stains and because the tenant kept a dog.
The amounts claimed has been established by the production of invoices. However, I have reduced the amount claimed ($304.75) to clean the premises because it includes cleaning of areas other than the blinds and oven and Ms White said that the premises (other than the blinds and oven) were left reasonably clean. I have also reduced the amount claimed ($431.25) to clean the carpets because it includes removal of stains in the lounge when the pre tenancy report records that there were existing stains in this room. Ms McWilliam claims that there were also existing stains in the master bedroom but there is no record of this in the pre tenancy report or any other evidence to support her claim.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

To be successful in a claim for damage, the 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: sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B of the Act.
There was no dispute that the damage to the walls occurred during the tenancy and was caused by Ms McWilliam attempting to remove mould from the walls in two bedrooms and the bathroom. Ms McWilliam claims that she used a product called “Exit Mould” to do so which resulted in damage to the walls.
The damage is beyond fair wear and tear and I am satisfied that it was caused by Ms McWilliams carelessness in using a product on the walls without first testing it in a small area to ensure that it would not cause damage.
The amount claimed has been established by the production of an invoice.
The landlord has been mostly successful in its claims, and I consider this an appropriate case to ward it payment of the Tribunal application fee.

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5167552 — net $1,665.50 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning	$200.00	Cleaning
Carpet Cleaning	$300.00	Carpet Cleaning
Repairs: Walls	$1,138.50	Repairs: Walls
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,665.50
Bond	$2,320.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,665.50

Claims and awards for application 5167552 — net $1,665.50 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Cleaning

Amount: $200.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning

Carpet Cleaning

Amount: $300.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Carpet Cleaning

Repairs: Walls

Amount: $1,138.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Walls

Filing fee reimbursement

Amount: $27.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Filing fee reimbursement

Net award

Landlord $1,665.50

Bond

Landlord $2,320.00

Total payable by Tenant to Landlord

Landlord $1,665.50

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Carpet Cleaning Cleanliness Filing Fee Property damage

Order

Kirsty McWilliam (previously known as Kirsty Brown) to pay Harper Property Management Limited, Ashwinkumar Patel, and Nehe Patel $1,665.50 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,320.00 (6129420-025 ) immediately apportioned as follows: Harper Property Management Limited acting agent for Ashwinkumar Patel, Nehe Patel : $1,665.50 Kirsty McWilliam: $654.50

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Ms White and Ms Stevenson represented the landlord.
The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

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

I am satisfied that the landlord has provided sufficient evidence (in particular photographic evidence) to establish that the oven and blinds at the premises were not left reasonably clean as required by section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act). I am also satisfied that the landlord has established that the carpets required cleaning due to stains and because the tenant kept a dog.
The amounts claimed has been established by the production of invoices. However, I have reduced the amount claimed ($304.75) to clean the premises because it includes cleaning of areas other than the blinds and oven and Ms White said that the premises (other than the blinds and oven) were left reasonably clean. I have also reduced the amount claimed ($431.25) to clean the carpets because it includes removal of stains in the lounge when the pre tenancy report records that there were existing stains in this room. Ms McWilliam claims that there were also existing stains in the master bedroom but there is no record of this in the pre tenancy report or any other evidence to support her claim.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

To be successful in a claim for damage, the 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: sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B of the Act.
There was no dispute that the damage to the walls occurred during the tenancy and was caused by Ms McWilliam attempting to remove mould from the walls in two bedrooms and the bathroom. Ms McWilliam claims that she used a product called “Exit Mould” to do so which resulted in damage to the walls.
The damage is beyond fair wear and tear and I am satisfied that it was caused by Ms McWilliams carelessness in using a product on the walls without first testing it in a small area to ensure that it would not cause damage.
The amount claimed has been established by the production of an invoice.
The landlord has been mostly successful in its claims, and I consider this an appropriate case to ward it payment of the Tribunal application fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5167552 — Property damage at Unit/Flat 1, 64 Hutchinson Avenue, New Lynn, Auckland

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5167552 — Property damage at Unit/Flat 1, 64 Hutchinson Avenue, New Lynn, Auckland

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