What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5207551?

The tribunal order states: Mereana-Angeline Alo Poa and Zac Luther Thomas must pay Kāinga Ora–

How much money was awarded in case 5207551?

Cleaning: $162.46 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $369.38 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5207551?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5207551?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12401839-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5207551?

The tribunal order states: Mereana-Angeline Alo Poa and Zac Luther Thomas must pay Kāinga Ora–

How much money was awarded in case 5207551?

Cleaning: $162.46 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $369.38 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5207551?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5207551?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12401839-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat Unit 2, 10 Gwendoline Avenue, Te Atatu Tenancy Tribunal Case 5207551 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Unit/Flat Unit 2, 10 Gwendoline Avenue, Te Atatu Tenancy Tribunal Case 5207551 — 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 5207551 — net $531.84 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Oven/stove cleaning	$162.46	Oven/stove cleaning
Repairs: Walls – repairs to holes and repainting	$369.38	Repairs: Walls – repairs to holes and repainting
Net award	$531.84
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$531.84

Claims and awards for application 5207551 — net $531.84 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Oven/stove cleaning

Amount: $162.46
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Oven/stove cleaning

Repairs: Walls – repairs to holes and repainting

Amount: $369.38
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Walls – repairs to holes and repainting

Net award

Landlord $531.84

Total payable by Tenant to Landlord

Landlord $531.84

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Property damage

Order

Mereana-Angeline Alo Poa and Zac Luther Thomas must pay Kāinga Ora– Homes And Communities $531.84 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing, set down to be conducted via video conference. There was no entry into the conference by the tenant, nor any prior contact with the Registry. A call to the tenant was attempted but unsuccessful. I was satisfied adequate service had completed and I continued with the hearing after the call went unanswered.
This was a continuation hearing after both parties attended, due to late evidence from the landlord. The adjourning order noted, “The tenants have indicated an intention to lodge a counterclaim. Further, service compliance was not certain prior but this is now confirmed with the tenant engaged and confirming current contact details at the hearing.”
No counterclaim has been filed.
The landlord has applied for compensation following 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 oven in a reasonable condition. The landlord claimed $162.84 and provided photographic evidence that evidenced the need for such cleaning to return the oven to a reasonably clean condition. This claim is awarded in full.

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.
Two walls had holes. These were sizable and clearly careless, if not intentional. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord provided invoices and photos in support of the claim. The tenant liability is established, and the cost considered reasonable. This claim is awarded in full.
The amount ordered is proved.
The landlord has already taken into account betterment and depreciation in the claimed amounts. 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. This application is appropriate and accepted. The claim of $369.38 for repairs reflects such consideration.

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 5207551 — net $531.84 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Oven/stove cleaning	$162.46	Oven/stove cleaning
Repairs: Walls – repairs to holes and repainting	$369.38	Repairs: Walls – repairs to holes and repainting
Net award	$531.84
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$531.84

Claims and awards for application 5207551 — net $531.84 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Oven/stove cleaning

Amount: $162.46
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Oven/stove cleaning

Repairs: Walls – repairs to holes and repainting

Amount: $369.38
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Walls – repairs to holes and repainting

Net award

Landlord $531.84

Total payable by Tenant to Landlord

Landlord $531.84

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Property damage

Order

Mereana-Angeline Alo Poa and Zac Luther Thomas must pay Kāinga Ora– Homes And Communities $531.84 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing, set down to be conducted via video conference. There was no entry into the conference by the tenant, nor any prior contact with the Registry. A call to the tenant was attempted but unsuccessful. I was satisfied adequate service had completed and I continued with the hearing after the call went unanswered.
This was a continuation hearing after both parties attended, due to late evidence from the landlord. The adjourning order noted, “The tenants have indicated an intention to lodge a counterclaim. Further, service compliance was not certain prior but this is now confirmed with the tenant engaged and confirming current contact details at the hearing.”
No counterclaim has been filed.
The landlord has applied for compensation following 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 oven in a reasonable condition. The landlord claimed $162.84 and provided photographic evidence that evidenced the need for such cleaning to return the oven to a reasonably clean condition. This claim is awarded in full.

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.
Two walls had holes. These were sizable and clearly careless, if not intentional. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord provided invoices and photos in support of the claim. The tenant liability is established, and the cost considered reasonable. This claim is awarded in full.
The amount ordered is proved.
The landlord has already taken into account betterment and depreciation in the claimed amounts. 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. This application is appropriate and accepted. The claim of $369.38 for repairs reflects such consideration.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5207551 — Property damage at Unit/Flat Unit 2, 10 Gwendoline Avenue, Te Atatu

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5207551 — Property damage at Unit/Flat Unit 2, 10 Gwendoline Avenue, Te Atatu

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

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

Frequently asked questions