What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5178376?

The tribunal order states: Bond Services to pay the bond of $2,260.00 to Russell Hardie Limited

How much money was awarded in case 5178376?

Individual award amounts are in the official MoJ PDF. Claim amounts appear on this page when claims and net totals reconcile.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5178376?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5178376?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11633978-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5178376?

The tribunal order states: Bond Services to pay the bond of $2,260.00 to Russell Hardie Limited

How much money was awarded in case 5178376?

Individual award amounts are in the official MoJ PDF. Claim amounts appear on this page when claims and net totals reconcile.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5178376?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5178376?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11633978-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

8 Moses Road, Ngapuna, Rotorua 3010 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5178376 — Property damage

Order

Bond Services to pay the bond of $2,260.00 to Russell Hardie Limited immediately.
Tahi te Whetu Marama o Ngakura Manahi to pay Russell Hardie Limited $1,780.11 immediately, calculated as follows: Award DescriptionAmount Rent arrears$80.81 Lock Changes$291.54 Cleaning Charges (total)$661.25 Grounds Tidy Up$147.50 Rubbish Removal$280.00 Carpet Cleaning$260.00 Reglaze Ranchslider$644.01 Repairs and Painting (Total awarded)$1,648.00 Application Filing Fee$27.00 Total$4,040.11 Minus Bond$2,260.00 Tenant to pay$1,780.11

Reasons

The Landlord attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 23 January 2025. The Landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy: $80.81

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: s 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
I address the Landlord’s claims, together with supporting pre-tenancy and post- tenancy photographs, in turn: a. Lock Changes ($291.54): The tenant failed to return the keys at the end of the tenancy, necessitating the replacement of locks to secure the property. Approved. b. Cleaning Charges ($575.00 + $86.25): The property was left in a very unclean state, with extensive cleaning needed to address multiple walls with pen drawings and general filth. Extra cleaning tasks included washing the hallway floor near the back door, re-hanging the shower curtain and cleaning areas in the bathroom like the wall around the heated towel rail switch, the corner ledge of the bath, and the toilet bowl rim, as well as washing the left curtain in the first bedroom on the right. Approved. c. Grounds Tidy Up ($147.50): The gardens and lawns were neglected, not weeded, or mowed, indicating a failure to maintain the property's exterior in a tidy condition. Approved. d. Rubbish Removal ($280.00): There was a considerable amount of rubbish and personal items left behind, which had to be removed from the property post-tenancy. Approved. e. Carpet Cleaning ($260.00): The carpets were left excessively dirty, requiring professional cleaning to restore them to a reasonably clean condition. Photographs show food, dirt and other organic material on the carpets surface. Approved.

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: a. Reglaze Ranchslider ($644.01): Significant damage to the ranchslider required reglazing, likely due to tenant misuse or negligence. Tenant said there was a jam, but there are signs of considerable blunt impact, causing the glass to shatter outwards, not crack or splinter. b. Repairs and painting ($1,748.00): i. In the lounge, all walls, which had nails or screws, were repaired and repainted, costing $600. ii. The front ranch slider net curtain was replaced and hung for $80, and a hole in the door leading to the hallway was repaired and repainted for $90. iii. In the kitchen, a hole in the back of a cupboard was fixed for $100, and areas around a window frame were repaired and repainted for $50 after removing screws and nails. iv. Additionally, childproof locks were removed from all cupboard doors and drawers with a cleanup of the sticky residue costing $100. v. Laundry repairs included painting over a removed screw for $40. vi. The first bedroom on the right required wall repainting and removal of screws and nails for $250, and pen marks on the door also necessitated repainting, adding $90 to the costs. vii. The end bedroom saw the removal of pen marks from the door for $20, and the garage needed a repair for a hole above the netball hoop, costing $100. viii. All work was confirmed with Landlord's pre-tenancy and post-tenancy photographs, although a pre-existing damage in bedroom requires a $100 reduction in the compensation total. ix. The landlord's photographs confirm the damage, which exceeds normal wear and tear due to a pattern of neglect and repetition, indicating intentional damage. Total awarded: $1,648.00
The amounts ordered are proved.
I have taken into account 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 calculating depreciation, I have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.
Because the Landlord has wholly succeeded with its application I reimburse to it the application filing fee of $27.00.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5178376 — Property damage at 8 Moses Road, Ngapuna, Rotorua 3010

Tenancy Tribunal case 5178376 — Property damage at 8 Moses Road, Ngapuna, Rotorua 3010

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Property management

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Property management