What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5218071?

The tribunal order states: Lisa Faafuata and Kendy Tautiaga must pay Opes Property Management North

How much money was awarded in case 5218071?

Cleaning: $230.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $680.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Heat Pump Remote: $149.50 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,600.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $273.73 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5218071?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5218071?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12155484-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5218071?

The tribunal order states: Lisa Faafuata and Kendy Tautiaga must pay Opes Property Management North

How much money was awarded in case 5218071?

Cleaning: $230.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $680.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Heat Pump Remote: $149.50 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,600.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $273.73 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5218071?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5218071?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12155484-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

73 Huri Street, Mangere Bridge, Auckland 2022 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5218071 — Property damage

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5218071 — net $3,060.23 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Insurance excess	$1,600.00	Insurance excess
Carpet Cleaning	$230.00	Carpet Cleaning
Heat pump remote	$149.50	Heat pump remote
Lawns and Garden work	$100.00	Lawns and Garden work
Lock/key replacement	$273.73	Lock/key replacement
Cleaning	$680.00	Cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,060.23
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,060.23

Order

Lisa Faafuata and Kendy Tautiaga must pay Opes Property Management North Limited as Agent for Resarf Limited $3,060.23 immediately, calculated as shown in table below. DescriptionLandlord Insurance excess$1,600.00 Carpet Cleaning$230.00 Heat pump remote$149.50 Lawns and Garden work$100.00 Lock/key replacement$273.73 Cleaning$680.00 Filing fee reimbursement$27.00 Total award$3,060.23 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$3,060.23

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing, the tenants did not attend. The tenants have been served with the notice of hearing and have not communicated with the Tribunal seeking an adjournment. I am proceeding with the hearing in the absence of the tenants.
The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Civil burden of proof for Tenancy Tribunal:
As with any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations. That means that it is for the party bringing the application (in this case, the landlord) to establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. That means that they must establish that what they are claiming is more likely than not. This is referred to as the “burden of proof”. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
As noted in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: ... [L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.

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 is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1) (ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy.
The tenants did not return the keys.
The landlord has provided the pre let inspection photos and the exit report and photos. The photos show the carpets were very dirty and heavily stained, the walls were marked and the house unclean.
The gardens were untidy.
The landlord has provided invoices for the cost of the cleaning, carpet cleaning and stain removal and garden tidy.
The tenants did not return the keys to the property. The landlord had to get new keys cut for the property and have provided an invoice for the cost of replacing the locks and keys.
I am satisfied that the landlord has proven their claims for the house cleaning, carpet cleaning and stain removal, garden tidy and replacement locks, and keys. 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 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: -The heat pump remote was broken and had to be replaced. -The bathroom vanity was hanging off the wall and the drawer was missing. -The tiles on the toilet floor were cracked and had to be replaced. -The walls throughout the house were dented, has holes and marks throughout, that needed to be replastered and repainted.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord has provided the detailed exit report and photos to show the damage and invoices for the cost of repairs.
The landlord was able to claim insurance on the damage and seeks to claim the excess of $400.00 per event for these claims. I am awarding the landlord $1600.00 for insurance excess costs.
The landlord also claimed the excess cost of replacing the lounge carpet as it was discoloured. However, I do not accept that this was damage, and I am dismissing their claim to replace the lounge carpet and refusing to award a further $400.00 for excess for that claim.
The landlord sought to claim for a few minor items such as fraying on the vertical blind, loose door and gate hinges and locks. I am dismissing these claims as these are normal wear and tear and general maintenance issues for a landlord and not damage.
Because Opes Property Management North Limited as Agent for Resarf Limited has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5218071 — net $3,060.23 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Insurance excess	$1,600.00	Insurance excess
Carpet Cleaning	$230.00	Carpet Cleaning
Heat pump remote	$149.50	Heat pump remote
Lawns and Garden work	$100.00	Lawns and Garden work
Lock/key replacement	$273.73	Lock/key replacement
Cleaning	$680.00	Cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,060.23
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,060.23

Order

Lisa Faafuata and Kendy Tautiaga must pay Opes Property Management North Limited as Agent for Resarf Limited $3,060.23 immediately, calculated as shown in table below. DescriptionLandlord Insurance excess$1,600.00 Carpet Cleaning$230.00 Heat pump remote$149.50 Lawns and Garden work$100.00 Lock/key replacement$273.73 Cleaning$680.00 Filing fee reimbursement$27.00 Total award$3,060.23 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$3,060.23

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing, the tenants did not attend. The tenants have been served with the notice of hearing and have not communicated with the Tribunal seeking an adjournment. I am proceeding with the hearing in the absence of the tenants.
The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Civil burden of proof for Tenancy Tribunal:
As with any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations. That means that it is for the party bringing the application (in this case, the landlord) to establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. That means that they must establish that what they are claiming is more likely than not. This is referred to as the “burden of proof”. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
As noted in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: ... [L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.

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 is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1) (ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy.
The tenants did not return the keys.
The landlord has provided the pre let inspection photos and the exit report and photos. The photos show the carpets were very dirty and heavily stained, the walls were marked and the house unclean.
The gardens were untidy.
The landlord has provided invoices for the cost of the cleaning, carpet cleaning and stain removal and garden tidy.
The tenants did not return the keys to the property. The landlord had to get new keys cut for the property and have provided an invoice for the cost of replacing the locks and keys.
I am satisfied that the landlord has proven their claims for the house cleaning, carpet cleaning and stain removal, garden tidy and replacement locks, and keys. 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 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: -The heat pump remote was broken and had to be replaced. -The bathroom vanity was hanging off the wall and the drawer was missing. -The tiles on the toilet floor were cracked and had to be replaced. -The walls throughout the house were dented, has holes and marks throughout, that needed to be replastered and repainted.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord has provided the detailed exit report and photos to show the damage and invoices for the cost of repairs.
The landlord was able to claim insurance on the damage and seeks to claim the excess of $400.00 per event for these claims. I am awarding the landlord $1600.00 for insurance excess costs.
The landlord also claimed the excess cost of replacing the lounge carpet as it was discoloured. However, I do not accept that this was damage, and I am dismissing their claim to replace the lounge carpet and refusing to award a further $400.00 for excess for that claim.
The landlord sought to claim for a few minor items such as fraying on the vertical blind, loose door and gate hinges and locks. I am dismissing these claims as these are normal wear and tear and general maintenance issues for a landlord and not damage.
Because Opes Property Management North Limited as Agent for Resarf Limited has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5218071 — Property damage at 73 Huri Street, Mangere Bridge, Auckland 2022

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5218071 — Property damage at 73 Huri Street, Mangere Bridge, Auckland 2022

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