What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5407369?

The tribunal order states: Jasmine Marie Grace-Frisken must pay Prestige Property Management Limited

How much money was awarded in case 5407369?

Cleaning: $431.25 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $900.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Methamphetamine Test Report Fees: $1,945.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $168.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,391.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $893.69 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Reglaze Broken Window In Porch (Part…: $158.55 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5407369?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Exemplary damages, Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5407369?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13359610-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5407369?

The tribunal order states: Jasmine Marie Grace-Frisken must pay Prestige Property Management Limited

How much money was awarded in case 5407369?

Cleaning: $431.25 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $900.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Methamphetamine Test Report Fees: $1,945.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $168.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,391.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $893.69 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Reglaze Broken Window In Porch (Part…: $158.55 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5407369?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Exemplary damages, Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5407369?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13359610-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat Flat 2, 12 Warwick Street, Richmond, Christchurch Tenancy Tribunal Case 5407369 — Property damage

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5407369 — net $6,915.99 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Lock/key replacement	$168.00	Lock/key replacement
Repair broken vanity; cover broken window; remove and dump rubbish; remove goods to garage	$1,391.50	Repair broken vanity; cover broken window; remove and dump rubbish; remove goods to garage
Reglaze broken window in porch (part paid by tenant	$158.55	Reglaze broken window in porch (part paid by tenant
Repair broken windows – porch and bedroom	$893.69	Repair broken windows – porch and bedroom
Replace missing gas califont *(insurance excess	$1,000.00	Replace missing gas califont *(insurance excess
Cleaning	$431.25	Cleaning
Methamphetamine test report fees	$1,945.00	Methamphetamine test report fees
Exemplary damages for unlawful use of premises	$900.00	Exemplary damages for unlawful use of premises
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$6,915.99
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$6,915.99

Ms Iles and Ms Bradford represented the landlord. The tenant did not attend the hearing.

The landlord has applied for compensation, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

The landlord has already received the bond which has been applied to rent arrears.

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 1 .

The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.

The tenant did not return the keys.

A gas califont was missing at the end of the tenancy.

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 2 . See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA.

The following damage was caused during the tenancy. Windows were broken and had to be repaired. The vanity unit was also broken. Methamphetamine contamination

The landlord has claimed the cost of remediating methamphetamine contamination.

I am satisfied that the tenant used or allowed the use of methamphetamine at the premises during the tenancy. A pre-tenancy methamphetamine test showed 1 See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) 2 See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA no contamination. A post-tenancy methamphetamine test showed positive levels of methamphetamine.

The individual methamphetamine tests show contamination levels between 0.42 μg/100cm² and 6.62μg/100cm².

Pending regulations being enacted (which will happen soon) the Tribunal works to a level of 15μg/100cm² before premises are considered contaminated to a level harmful to human health. That level was set based on the advice given to a previous government by the then Prime Minister’s Chief Science Advisor, Professor Sir Peter Gluckman.

The District Court has endorsed the Tribunal’s approach in a series of decisions beginning with Full Circle Real Estate Limited v Piper 3 .

The methamphetamine testing companies continue to work to the level of

5μg/100cm² set by the New Zealand standard NZS8510:2017 despite knowing the Tribunal’s position based on case law.

Because the premises are not considered harmful to health due to the low levels of contamination, the Tribunal cannot award the considerable remediation costs claimed by the landlord (almost $9,000.00) nor can it award loss of rent compensation. Those claims are dismissed.

The Tribunal is prepared to award the cost of the methamphetamine test reports because the reports establish (and were necessary to show) that the tenant used or allowed the use of methamphetamine during the tenancy. Exemplary damages

Using premises for an unlawful premises is a breach of a tenant’s responsibilities 4 and is an unlawful act 5 .

The possession and use of methamphetamine is an offence under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975.

The Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to $1,800.00 for this unlawful act 6 .

Exemplary damages are designed to punish and to deter. They are like a fine.

When deciding whether to award exemplary damages, the Tribunal must consider the factors set out in section 109 RTA. They are: • The intention of the person; 3 [2019] NZDC 4947 4 See section 40(2)(b) RTA 5 See section 3A)(c) RTA 6 See Schedule 1A RTA • The effect of the unlawful act; • The interests of the party against whom the unlawful act was committed; and • The public interest.

I find that this is a case where the Tribunal should award exemplary damages for the tenant’s unlawful act, intentionally committed. The effect of the unlawful act on the landlord has been considerable. The landlord has incurred costs which it cannot recover. It is against the public interest for tenants to use residential tenancy premises for an unlawful purpose. I award the landlord $900.00. Result

The tenant will pay the landlord $6,915.99 which includes reimbursement of the filing fee.

The landlord’s application for methamphetamine remediation costs and for loss of rent compensation is dismissed.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5407369 — net $6,915.99 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Lock/key replacement	$168.00	Lock/key replacement
Repair broken vanity; cover broken window; remove and dump rubbish; remove goods to garage	$1,391.50	Repair broken vanity; cover broken window; remove and dump rubbish; remove goods to garage
Reglaze broken window in porch (part paid by tenant	$158.55	Reglaze broken window in porch (part paid by tenant
Repair broken windows – porch and bedroom	$893.69	Repair broken windows – porch and bedroom
Replace missing gas califont *(insurance excess	$1,000.00	Replace missing gas califont *(insurance excess
Cleaning	$431.25	Cleaning
Methamphetamine test report fees	$1,945.00	Methamphetamine test report fees
Exemplary damages for unlawful use of premises	$900.00	Exemplary damages for unlawful use of premises
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$6,915.99
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$6,915.99

Order

Jasmine Marie Grace-Frisken must pay Prestige Property Management Limited $6,915.99 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:

The application for methamphetamine remediation costs is dismissed.
The application for loss of rent compensation is dismissed.

Reasons

Ms Iles and Ms Bradford represented the landlord. The tenant did not attend the hearing.
The landlord has applied for compensation, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The landlord has already received the bond which has been applied to rent arrears.

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 1 .
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
The tenant did not return the keys.
A gas califont was missing at the end of the tenancy.
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 2 . See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA.
The following damage was caused during the tenancy. Windows were broken and had to be repaired. The vanity unit was also broken. Methamphetamine contamination
The landlord has claimed the cost of remediating methamphetamine contamination.
I am satisfied that the tenant used or allowed the use of methamphetamine at the premises during the tenancy. A pre-tenancy methamphetamine test showed 1 See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) 2 See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA no contamination. A post-tenancy methamphetamine test showed positive levels of methamphetamine.
The individual methamphetamine tests show contamination levels between 0.42 μg/100cm² and 6.62μg/100cm².
Pending regulations being enacted (which will happen soon) the Tribunal works to a level of 15μg/100cm² before premises are considered contaminated to a level harmful to human health. That level was set based on the advice given to a previous government by the then Prime Minister’s Chief Science Advisor, Professor Sir Peter Gluckman.
The District Court has endorsed the Tribunal’s approach in a series of decisions beginning with Full Circle Real Estate Limited v Piper 3 .
The methamphetamine testing companies continue to work to the level of
5μg/100cm² set by the New Zealand standard NZS8510:2017 despite knowing the Tribunal’s position based on case law.
Because the premises are not considered harmful to health due to the low levels of contamination, the Tribunal cannot award the considerable remediation costs claimed by the landlord (almost $9,000.00) nor can it award loss of rent compensation. Those claims are dismissed.
The Tribunal is prepared to award the cost of the methamphetamine test reports because the reports establish (and were necessary to show) that the tenant used or allowed the use of methamphetamine during the tenancy. Exemplary damages
Using premises for an unlawful premises is a breach of a tenant’s responsibilities 4 and is an unlawful act 5 .
The possession and use of methamphetamine is an offence under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975.
The Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to $1,800.00 for this unlawful act 6 .
Exemplary damages are designed to punish and to deter. They are like a fine.
When deciding whether to award exemplary damages, the Tribunal must consider the factors set out in section 109 RTA. They are: • The intention of the person; 3 [2019] NZDC 4947 4 See section 40(2)(b) RTA 5 See section 3A)(c) RTA 6 See Schedule 1A RTA • The effect of the unlawful act; • The interests of the party against whom the unlawful act was committed; and • The public interest.
I find that this is a case where the Tribunal should award exemplary damages for the tenant’s unlawful act, intentionally committed. The effect of the unlawful act on the landlord has been considerable. The landlord has incurred costs which it cannot recover. It is against the public interest for tenants to use residential tenancy premises for an unlawful purpose. I award the landlord $900.00. Result
The tenant will pay the landlord $6,915.99 which includes reimbursement of the filing fee.
The landlord’s application for methamphetamine remediation costs and for loss of rent compensation is dismissed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5407369 — Property damage at Unit/Flat Flat 2, 12 Warwick Street, Richmond, Christchurch

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5407369 — Property damage at Unit/Flat Flat 2, 12 Warwick Street, Richmond, Christchurch

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