What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5178399?

The tribunal order states: Michelle Petersen must pay Eves Realty Limited $4,063.21 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 5178399?

Cleaning: $345.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $270.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $450.00 awarded to landlord; Ranch Slider Glass: $466.92 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $4,034.29 awarded to landlord; Hole In The Wall: $270.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5178399?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5178399?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11758935-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5178399?

The tribunal order states: Michelle Petersen must pay Eves Realty Limited $4,063.21 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 5178399?

Cleaning: $345.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $270.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $450.00 awarded to landlord; Ranch Slider Glass: $466.92 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $4,034.29 awarded to landlord; Hole In The Wall: $270.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5178399?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5178399?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11758935-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

36 Philip Street, Putaruru, Putaruru 3411 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5178399 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

36 Philip Street, Putaruru, Putaruru 3411 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5178399 — Rent arrears | 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 5178399 — net $4,063.21 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 28 December 2024	$4,034.29	Rent arrears to 28 December 2024
Repairs: hole in the wall	$270.00	Repairs: hole in the wall
Carpet Cleaning	$345.00	Carpet Cleaning
Cleaning	$270.00	Cleaning
Ranch slider glass	$466.92	Ranch slider glass
Lawns and Garden work: and rubbish	$450.00	Lawns and Garden work: and rubbish
Filing fee	$27.00	Filing fee
Net award	$4,063.21
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,063.21

Claims and awards for application 5178399 — net $4,063.21 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears to 28 December 2024

Amount: $4,034.29
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears to 28 December 2024

Repairs: hole in the wall

Amount: $270.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: hole in the wall

Carpet Cleaning

Amount: $345.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Carpet Cleaning

Cleaning

Amount: $270.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning

Ranch slider glass

Amount: $466.92
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Ranch slider glass

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Carpet Cleaning Cleanliness Filing Fee Lawns And Garden Work Rent arrears Property damage

Order

Michelle Petersen must pay Eves Realty Limited $4,063.21 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,800.00 (6385197-017) to Eves Realty Limited immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not appear. The landlord confirmed that the tenants email address was supplied as an address for service. The hearing continued in their absence.
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 28 December 2024. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.

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 oven and vanity required cleaning and there was evidence of cobwebs around the windows. There was insufficient evidence provided to support the amount claimed for house cleaning, therefore a reduced amount is awarded.
The carpets in the master bedroom, first bedroom, lounge and dining room were stained and yellow. The landlord said there was also a smelled of urine which made her suspect a pet had been inside, although one was not permitted in the tenancy agreement.
After the tenancy ended the landlord had the carpets professionally cleaned and the amount claimed fir this is awarded is awarded.
The lawns were overgrown, and gardens required weeding. There was rubbish left behind which included tires, a desk, boxes, and full rubbish bins. This amount is awarded as claimed.
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 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: Hole in wall
Evidence was provided that damage to the wall around the light switch by the garage occurred during the tenancy. The landlord was not told about this damage. Carpets
The carpet in 4 rooms was stained. The landlord said that the premises were re carpeted during the tenancy and it was left stained and smelling when the tenancy ended and after it had been professionally cleaned. The landlord sought reimbursement of four insurance excesses for a claim to replace the carpet.
The carpet has not been replaced and the premises have been re-tenanted.
The landlord was unable to provide evidence that new carpet had been installed during the tenancy. A landlord was unable to prove that damage to the premises occurred during the tenancy. This claim is dismissed. Ranch slider.
The glass in the ranch slider window was broken during the tenancy. Pre and post tenancy photographs were provided.
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 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 Eves Realty Limited has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing 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 5178399 — net $4,063.21 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 28 December 2024	$4,034.29	Rent arrears to 28 December 2024
Repairs: hole in the wall	$270.00	Repairs: hole in the wall
Carpet Cleaning	$345.00	Carpet Cleaning
Cleaning	$270.00	Cleaning
Ranch slider glass	$466.92	Ranch slider glass
Lawns and Garden work: and rubbish	$450.00	Lawns and Garden work: and rubbish
Filing fee	$27.00	Filing fee
Net award	$4,063.21
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,063.21

Claims and awards for application 5178399 — net $4,063.21 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears to 28 December 2024

Amount: $4,034.29
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears to 28 December 2024

Repairs: hole in the wall

Amount: $270.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: hole in the wall

Carpet Cleaning

Amount: $345.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Carpet Cleaning

Cleaning

Amount: $270.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning

Ranch slider glass

Amount: $466.92
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Ranch slider glass

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Carpet Cleaning Cleanliness Filing Fee Lawns And Garden Work Rent arrears Property damage

Order

Michelle Petersen must pay Eves Realty Limited $4,063.21 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,800.00 (6385197-017) to Eves Realty Limited immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not appear. The landlord confirmed that the tenants email address was supplied as an address for service. The hearing continued in their absence.
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 28 December 2024. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.

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 oven and vanity required cleaning and there was evidence of cobwebs around the windows. There was insufficient evidence provided to support the amount claimed for house cleaning, therefore a reduced amount is awarded.
The carpets in the master bedroom, first bedroom, lounge and dining room were stained and yellow. The landlord said there was also a smelled of urine which made her suspect a pet had been inside, although one was not permitted in the tenancy agreement.
After the tenancy ended the landlord had the carpets professionally cleaned and the amount claimed fir this is awarded is awarded.
The lawns were overgrown, and gardens required weeding. There was rubbish left behind which included tires, a desk, boxes, and full rubbish bins. This amount is awarded as claimed.
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 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: Hole in wall
Evidence was provided that damage to the wall around the light switch by the garage occurred during the tenancy. The landlord was not told about this damage. Carpets
The carpet in 4 rooms was stained. The landlord said that the premises were re carpeted during the tenancy and it was left stained and smelling when the tenancy ended and after it had been professionally cleaned. The landlord sought reimbursement of four insurance excesses for a claim to replace the carpet.
The carpet has not been replaced and the premises have been re-tenanted.
The landlord was unable to provide evidence that new carpet had been installed during the tenancy. A landlord was unable to prove that damage to the premises occurred during the tenancy. This claim is dismissed. Ranch slider.
The glass in the ranch slider window was broken during the tenancy. Pre and post tenancy photographs were provided.
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 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 Eves Realty Limited has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5178399 — Rent arrears at 36 Philip Street, Putaruru, Putaruru 3411

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5178399 — Rent arrears at 36 Philip Street, Putaruru, Putaruru 3411

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

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?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

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?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions