What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5172591?

The tribunal order states: Mziwamadoda Maseko must pay TAJ Properties Limited Carrington $1,327.00

How much money was awarded in case 5172591?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $650.00 awarded to landlord; Cedar Cladding: $650.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5172591?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5172591?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11883788-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5172591?

The tribunal order states: Mziwamadoda Maseko must pay TAJ Properties Limited Carrington $1,327.00

How much money was awarded in case 5172591?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $650.00 awarded to landlord; Cedar Cladding: $650.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5172591?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5172591?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11883788-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 1, 66 Powderham Street, New Plymouth, New Tenancy Tribunal Case 5172591 — Property damage

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5172591 — net $1,327.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Repairs: Carpet - Insurance Excess	$650.00	Repairs: Carpet - Insurance Excess
Repairs: Cedar Cladding	$650.00	Repairs: Cedar Cladding
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,327.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,327.00

Mziwamadoda Maseko must pay TAJ Properties Limited Carrington $1,327.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below. DescriptionLandlord Repairs: Carpet - Insurance Excess$650.00 Repairs: Cedar Cladding$650.00 Filing fee reimbursement$27.00 Total award$1,327.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$1,327.00

The landlord’s other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

Mr Maseko was one of two joint tenants. The landlord has chosen to make its claim against him, alone. The landlord is entitled to do that. Where there is a joint tenancy, the tenants are jointly and individually liable to the landlord.

The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. The bond was released to the tenants after they made a one party bond application to the Bond Centre.

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 landlord claims that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish, but did not provide any photographs to support its claim. The tenant says that it did clean the property.

The landlord has the onus of a proving its claims; it must establish that it is more likely than not that the tenant breached its obligations, and that the landlord has suffered the loss claimed. In the absence of photographs and other corroborative evidence, I cannot be satisfied that it is more likely than not that the premises were not reasonably clean at the end of the tenancy. This aspect of the claim is dismissed.

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 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.

The landlord claimed that a range of damage occurred during the tenancy but did not provide any corroborative evidence of the condition of the property at the start of the tenancy. The tenant disputed the claims. The photographs of damage to the Jute carpet and the cedar cladding establish that that damage was recent. I accept that that damage occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. The tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. I award two insurance excesses in respect of that damage.

The other claims are dismissed for lack of evidence from the start of the tenancy.

A claim for plumbing repairs is dismissed. While the tenant should have advised the landlord of the need for repair, the items repaired (shower mixer, tap, toilet cistern) are landlord maintenance issues.

As the landlord was partially successful, I have awarded reimbursement of the Tribunal application fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5172591 — net $1,327.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Repairs: Carpet - Insurance Excess	$650.00	Repairs: Carpet - Insurance Excess
Repairs: Cedar Cladding	$650.00	Repairs: Cedar Cladding
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,327.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,327.00

Order

Mziwamadoda Maseko must pay TAJ Properties Limited Carrington $1,327.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below. DescriptionLandlord Repairs: Carpet - Insurance Excess$650.00 Repairs: Cedar Cladding$650.00 Filing fee reimbursement$27.00 Total award$1,327.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$1,327.00
The landlord’s other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
Mr Maseko was one of two joint tenants. The landlord has chosen to make its claim against him, alone. The landlord is entitled to do that. Where there is a joint tenancy, the tenants are jointly and individually liable to the landlord.
The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. The bond was released to the tenants after they made a one party bond application to the Bond Centre.

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 landlord claims that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish, but did not provide any photographs to support its claim. The tenant says that it did clean the property.
The landlord has the onus of a proving its claims; it must establish that it is more likely than not that the tenant breached its obligations, and that the landlord has suffered the loss claimed. In the absence of photographs and other corroborative evidence, I cannot be satisfied that it is more likely than not that the premises were not reasonably clean at the end of the tenancy. This aspect of the claim is dismissed.

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 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.
The landlord claimed that a range of damage occurred during the tenancy but did not provide any corroborative evidence of the condition of the property at the start of the tenancy. The tenant disputed the claims. The photographs of damage to the Jute carpet and the cedar cladding establish that that damage was recent. I accept that that damage occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. The tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. I award two insurance excesses in respect of that damage.
The other claims are dismissed for lack of evidence from the start of the tenancy.
A claim for plumbing repairs is dismissed. While the tenant should have advised the landlord of the need for repair, the items repaired (shower mixer, tap, toilet cistern) are landlord maintenance issues.
As the landlord was partially successful, I have awarded reimbursement of the Tribunal application fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5172591 — Property damage at Unit/Flat 1, 66 Powderham Street, New Plymouth, New

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5172591 — Property damage at Unit/Flat 1, 66 Powderham Street, New Plymouth, New

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

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

Dismissed claims

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