What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5224195?

The tribunal order states: Rachel Rebecca Danilo must pay Mackys Real Estate Limited As Agent For Tony

How much money was awarded in case 5224195?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $450.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $450.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $43.97 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $55.80 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $5,955.71 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $926.32 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5224195?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5224195?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12025842-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5224195?

The tribunal order states: Rachel Rebecca Danilo must pay Mackys Real Estate Limited As Agent For Tony

How much money was awarded in case 5224195?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $450.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $450.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $43.97 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $55.80 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $5,955.71 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $926.32 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5224195?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5224195?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12025842-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

111 Yorke Road, Haruru, Haruru 0204 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5224195 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Reasons

Background:

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5224195 — net $6,308.80 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 14/05/2025	$5,955.71	5. The Applicant has asked me to make the following awards: a) Rent arrears of $5,955.71 to 14 May 2025; b) Water rates arrears of $926.32 to 17 May 2025; c) R…
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Replacement Chain	$43.97	Replacement Chain
Replacement lock	$55.80	Replacement lock
Meth testing/Cleaning: Insurance/Excess	$450.00	Meth testing/Cleaning: Insurance/Excess
Garage Door: Insurance Excess	$450.00	Garage Door: Insurance Excess
Water rates to 17/05/2025	$926.32	Water rates to 17/05/2025
Net award	$6,308.80
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$6,308.80

The Applicant filed an application on Thursday, 3 April 2025, seeking termination of the tenancy, rent arrears, and outgoings. On Wednesday, 18 June 2025, the application was updated to include vacated tenancy costs. Tenancy Services served the Respondent with the updated application on the same day. The Applicants Case:

The Applicant attended the hearing by video.

The Applicant’s representative explained that the original claim was for rent arrears and termination of the tenancy. As the tenancy has since ended, the Applicant now seeks costs associated with the vacated tenancy.

The matter was initially scheduled for mediation, which the Respondent did not attend. A 90-day termination notice then expired on 14 May 2025, at which point the tenancy ended. The Applicant provided screenshots from security cameras, which were installed around 20 May 2025, due to suspicions that the Respondent was returning to the property. The screenshots show multiple individuals returning to the property on 21 May and 26 May, remaining there for several hours.

The Applicant has asked me to make the following awards: a) Rent arrears of $5,955.71 to 14 May 2025; b) Water rates arrears of $926.32 to 17 May 2025; c) Replacement lock and chain costs of $43.97 and $55.80. The Applicant provided photos showing the Respondent returning to the property after the tenancy had ended. The Applicant stated that the Respondent spent several hours at the property with associates, and after this visit, the lock and chain securing the gate were no longer present; d) Insurance excess of $450.00 for methamphetamine decontamination; e) Insurance excess of $450.00 for the replacement of garage doors. The Applicant provided photos showing the garage doors during the tenancy and photos of the doors having been removed at the conclusion of the tenancy; f) The application filing fee of $27.00. The Respondents Case:

The Respondent did not participate in the hearing. Two calls to the provided contact number went unanswered. Relevant Legal Considerations:

The landlord must prove that damage occurred during the tenancy and exceeds fair wear and tear (ss 49A, 49B, 66K(2)(a), 66L RTA). If proven, the tenant must demonstrate that it was not caused carelessly or intentionally. Tenants are liable for damage caused by individuals present with their permission.

Where careless damage is covered by insurance, tenant liability is limited to the lesser of the insurance excess or four weeks’ rent (s 49B(3)(a) RTA).

If damage is not covered by insurance or is uninsurable due to the tenant’s actions, the tenant’s liability is limited to four weeks’ rent (s 49B(3)(b) and 49B(3A)(a) RTA).

Compensation must account for depreciation and avoid betterment. The landlord should be restored to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached their obligations.

Under section 45(1)(a) RTA, the landlord must provide, and the tenant must return, the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy condition, with all rubbish removed.

The standard is "reasonably clean and tidy," not immaculate. The Tribunal assesses the condition based on evidence, including photographs, and considers the tenancy duration and the property’s general condition.

Under section 40(2)(b) RTA, a tenant must not use, or permit the use of, the premises for any unlawful purpose.

In Barfoot & Thompson Limited v Kāhui Tū Kaha Limited [2021] NZTT Auckland 4276319, the Tribunal considered two methods for determining unsafe levels of methamphetamine contamination. The first method, preferred by the Tribunal, is based on the Gluckman Report (2018), led by the Prime Minister’s Chief Science Advisor, Professor Sir Peter Gluckman. This report concludes that there is no evidence of health risk from third-party exposure to methamphetamine residues at or below 15 μg/100cm², except where there is evidence of manufacture. Although this level is not prescribed by law, it is recognised by the Tribunal as the most current and scientifically robust guideline, supported by the District Court in Full Circle Real Estate v Piper [2019]. The second method is the NZS 8510:2017 New Zealand Standard, which recommends a more conservative threshold of 1.5 μg/100cm². While not binding, this standard continues to provide a useful reference point. In this case, the Tribunal adopted the 15 μg/100cm² threshold as the appropriate level for requiring remediation, in line with prevailing scientific understanding. Reasons:

The Applicant has provided rent records showing outstanding rent up to 14 May 2025. I am satisfied this amount—$5,955.71—is accurate, and I therefore award this amount.

The Applicant has provided records showing outstanding water rates of $926.32 to 17 May 2025. I am satisfied these records are accurate, and I therefore award this amount.

The Applicant provided evidence of methamphetamine testing prior to the tenancy, showing no contamination. Additional reports from the end of the tenancy show at least one space with contamination levels of 16.3 μg/100cm², above the Gluckman standard threshold. The Applicant provided insurance documentation showing an excess of $650.00 was payable. They have claimed the $450.00 excess recorded in the tenancy agreement. I award this cost for returning the property to a reasonably clean and tidy state. I am also satisfied that the contamination occurred due to the Respondent’s breach of section 40(2)(b), by using or permitting the property to be used for an unlawful purpose.

I am satisfied that the Respondent removed, or permitted the removal of, the garage doors. The Applicant provided evidence indicating the replacement cost will be between $880.00 and $1,390.00. They have asked for the $450.00 insurance excess, consistent with the tenancy agreement of 2019. I make this award, taking into account betterment and depreciation. The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the Respondent not breached their obligations; they should not receive compensation that leaves them in a better position. I have considered the age and condition of the doors at the time of the damage and their useful life span. Although the landlord will receive new doors, they would not have incurred any expense but for the Respondent’s actions. Further investigation is only likely to increase the Respondent’s legal and financial liability.

The Applicant reported that, following an unauthorised visit to the property on 21 May 2025, the lock and chain securing the gate were missing. The Applicant provided screenshots showing the replacement costs of comparable items. I am satisfied that the tenants removed these items and that the Applicant intends to use the award to replace them. I therefore award $43.97 for the galvanised chain and $55.80 for the replacement padlock.

Because Mackys Real Estate Limited As Agent For Tony & Sonja Goss has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Reasons

Background:

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5224195 — net $6,308.80 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 14/05/2025	$5,955.71	5. The Applicant has asked me to make the following awards: a) Rent arrears of $5,955.71 to 14 May 2025; b) Water rates arrears of $926.32 to 17 May 2025; c) R…
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Replacement Chain	$43.97	Replacement Chain
Replacement lock	$55.80	Replacement lock
Meth testing/Cleaning: Insurance/Excess	$450.00	Meth testing/Cleaning: Insurance/Excess
Garage Door: Insurance Excess	$450.00	Garage Door: Insurance Excess
Water rates to 17/05/2025	$926.32	Water rates to 17/05/2025
Net award	$6,308.80
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$6,308.80