Tenant ordered to pay $17,692.19 for damages

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5164051 1

[2025] NZTT 5164051

TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT CHRISTCHURCH | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA KI ŌTAUTAHI

APPLICANT: [redacted]

Landlord

RESPONDENT: [redacted]

Tenant

TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

ORDER

1. [NAME] must pay [COMPANY] $17,692.19 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

2. The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $272.00 (5885060-002) to [COMPANY] immediately.

3. The landlord’s other claims are dismissed.

Description Landlord Tenant Rubbish removal $505.10 Curtain cleaning $92.00 Window repairs $634.25 Replace and paint wardrobe doors in small bedroom $851.00 Repair skirtings, architraves $1,449.00 Repair/replace walls, ceiling, windowsill, doors, shelving, smoke alarm, shower door. Remove sensor light and washing line

$4,464.35

Replace carpets in lounge and bedroom $1,367.35 Replace kitchen benchtop $1,897.50 Replace French doors $5,119.64 Replace front door $1,557.00 Filing fee reimbursement $27.00 Total award $17,964.19 Bond $272.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord $17,692.19

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5164051 2

Reasons:

1. Both parties attended the hearing. [NAME] represented the landlord. [NAME] was assisted by [NAME] ad [NAME] from [NAME].

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

3. [NAME] accepts the claim for removing rubbish and the claim for curtain cleaning.

4. The damage claims are as set out in the invoices provided by the landlord. [NAME] accepts all of these claims except:

• Repairing holes in the kitchen and small bedroom

• Removing second towel rail in the bathroom

• Replacing shower door

• Replacing curtain tracks in the lounge and bedroom

• Replacing/repairing the garage door

• Replacing the front door

• Replacing the rear French doors

5. [NAME] also disputed the damage to the kitchen drawer and cupboard edges, but [NAME] withdrew these claims at the hearing.

Wall damage in kitchen and small bedroom

6. To be successful in a claim for damage to the premises, the landlord must prove that damage occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. If this is established, to avoid liability, the tenant must prove they, or others at the premises with their permission, did not carelessly or intentionally cause or permit the damage: sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act).

7. Carelessness is not defined in the Act but it has its normal meaning of lack of care, negligence or lack of forethought. The standard of care required is similar to the standard of care required by the general law of tort in negligence cases. Thus, the question can be expressed as whether the tenant, or some other person at the premises with the tenant’s permission, was exercising that degree of care and attention that a reasonable and prudent tenant would exercise in the circumstances.

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5164051 3

8. [NAME] does not dispute the damage claimed however he said that he plastered the holes in the kitchen and the small bedroom to an acceptable standard. He also said that he painted the areas repaired but he accepts that the painting was not of an acceptable standard (he claims this was because the paint supplied by the landlord was not of good quality). He said that one of the holes in the small bedroom had been repaired earlier in the tenancy by the landlord but was not repaired adequately and he was therefore able to put his hand through the repaired area.

9. On the evidence before me, including the photographs provided by the landlord, I am satisfied that [NAME] did not complete both the plastering and painting work to an adequate standard. I also find him liable for the hole he said occurred when he put his hand through repair work completed by the landlord. Even if the work was not completed to an adequate standard, it is likely to require some force to push his hand through the repair, and therefore his actions in doing so are below the standard expected of a reasonable prudent tenant.

10. The amount ordered has been established by the amounts recorded on an invoice dated 26 February 2025 from [COMPANY] (the 26 February invoice).

Removal of second towel rail and repair wall

11. I dismiss this claim.

12. I accept [NAME]’s evidence that the second towel rail was in the bathroom at the commencement of the tenancy. [NAME] did not dispute his evidence and either did she provide any evidence, such as a pre tenancy inspection report or photographs of the bathroom taken at the start of the tenancy, to support the number of towel rails provided.

13. The cost to remove the towel rail and repair the wall after its removal is included in the 26 February invoice but has not been specifically itemised. Doing the best I can on the evidence provided I consider the sum of $150.00 reasonable to be deducted from the invoice total.

Shower door

14. [NAME] said that the magnetic strip on the edge of the glass shower door was missing leaving a gap, and a replacement strip was not able to be obtained. The door was therefore replaced.

15. [NAME] accepts that the strip was missing but said this was because the door was hard to open. He said that there was handle on the door and he had to pull it hard from the top to open it.

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5164051 4

16. I find [NAME] liable for the missing strip. I consider that it is more likely than not that the strip came off due to careless or rough use of the door by [NAME] or others at the premises with his permission.

17. The amount ordered has been established in the 26 February invoice.

Curtain tracks

18. I find [NAME] liable to replace the curtain tracks in the lounge and bedroom. [NAME] said that both of these tracks were bent in the middle and could not be repaired.

19. I am not persuaded by [NAME]’s evidence that the damage to the tracks (which he said was them “falling to bits” or falling to the ground) was caused by there being insufficient brackets holding them up. I find that it is more likely than not that the tracks were bent by careless or rough use by [NAME] or others at the premises with his permission.

20. The amount ordered is recorded on the 26 February invoice.

The Garage door

21. This claim is dismissed.

22. I accept [NAME]’s evidence (which was not disputed by [NAME]) that the damage claimed to the garage door was caused by [NAME]’s neighbour who [NAME] believes was attempting to steal a lawnmower from the garage. The neighbour was not at the premises with [NAME]’s permission. [NAME] said that he was at home when the incident occurred. As mentioned above, a tenant is only liable for damage caused by him or by someone at the premises with his permission.

23. The 26 February invoice records the cost of $707.25 (including GST) to repair the doorframe and replace the door. However, it also includes work that [NAME] accepts (removing shelving and a sensor light and making good). Again, doing the best I can on the evidence I have I considered a deduction from the amount claimed of $600.00 (inclusive of GST) to account for the door repair work.

Carpets and bench top

24. [NAME] accepts the claim for damage to the lounge and bedroom carpets and to the kitchen benchtop. The amount claimed to replace the carpets is $2,357.50 and the amount claimed to replace the bench top is $2,833.60.

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5164051 5

25. However, I have reduced the amount claimed for both to account for betterment and depreciation. A 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 of the items and their likely useful lifespan.

26. The carpets and the bench top were new when the tenancy started in December 2019. Thus, both were just over five years old at the end of the tenancy. Carpets are expected to last approximately 12 years before requiring replacement and laminate benchtops are expected to last approximately 15 years. I have therefore reduced the amount claimed to replace the carpets by 42%, and the amount claimed for the benchtop by 33%.

The front door and the rear French doors

27. [NAME] said that the French doors were damaged in the middle of the doors by a lock being installed too close to the edge which caused the wood to crack. He said the crack extended over time with use of the doors. He said that the bottom of the door was damaged because he had to kick or push the door with his foot to open it. He said that the wood would expand in winter causing the door to stick.

28. Section 40(1)(d) of the Act is relevant here. That section requires a tenant to notify the landlord, as soon as possible after discovery, of any damage or of the need for repairs. [NAME] accepts that he did not tell the landlord about the door sticking until the damage had started to occur, although [NAME] denies being told at all about the problem with the door sticking.

29. I find [NAME] liable for the damage to the door. I consider that the damage was caused carelessly by him, or others at the premises with his permission, by continuing to use force to open the door knowing that it was causing damage to it. I consider that a reasonable prudent tenant would ensure that the landlord remedied the problem with the door before continuing to use it.

30. I also find [NAME] liable for the need to replace the front door. It was not disputed that at least one of the five glass panels in the door were broken during the tenancy ([NAME] claims it was only one, [NAME] said it was four of the five).

31. The glass in the panel(s) were replaced during the tenancy but because they were required to be replaced by safety glass, which is thicker than the existing glass, the existing beadings would not fit. Replacement beadings of the required size could not be found, and [NAME] said that the door had to be replaced. [NAME] also said that the lock was damaged ([NAME] accepts that the lock and handle required replacement but denied the door was kicked in as claimed by [NAME]).

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5164051 6

32. The amounts ordered to replace both doors has been established by the production of invoices.

33. The landlord has been mostly successful in its claims ad I consider this an appropriate case to award it payment of the Tribunal application fee.

[NAME]

27 May 2025

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5164051 7

Please read carefully: Visit justice.govt.nz/tribunals/tenancy/rehearings-appeals for more information on rehearings and appeals.

Rehearings You can apply for a rehearing if you believe that a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice has happened. For example: • you did not get the letter telling you the date of the hearing, or • the adjudicator improperly admitted or rejected evidence, or • new evidence, relating to the original application, has become available.

You must give reasons and evidence to support your application for a rehearing. A rehearing will not be granted just because you disagree with the decision. You must apply within five working days of the decision using the Application for Rehearing form: justice.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Forms/TT-Application-for-rehearing.pdf

Right of Appeal Both the landlord and the tenant can file an appeal. You should file your appeal at the District Court where the original hearing took place. The cost for an appeal is $260. You must apply within 10 working days after the decision is issued using this Appeal to the District Court form: justice.govt.nz/tribunals/tenancy/rehearings-appeals

Grounds for an appeal You can appeal if you think the decision was wrong, but not because you don’t like the decision. For some cases, there’ll be no right to appeal. For example, you can’t appeal: • against an interim order • a final order for the payment of less than $1000 • a final order to undertake work worth less than $1000.

Enforcement Where the Tribunal made an order about money or property this is called a civil debt. The Ministry of Justice Collections Team can assist with enforcing civil debt. You can contact the collections team on [PHONE] or go to justice.govt.nz/fines/civil-debt for forms and information.

Notice to a party ordered to pay money or vacate premises, etc. Failure to comply with any order may result in substantial additional costs for enforcement. It may also involve being ordered to appear in the District Court for an examination of your means or seizure of your property.

If you require further help or information regarding this matter, visit tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing- decisions or phone Tenancy Services on [PHONE].

Mēna ka hiahia koe ki ētahi atu awhina, kōrero ranei mo tēnei take, haere ki tenei ipurangi tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions, waea atu ki Ratonga Takirua ma runga [PHONE] ranei.

https://www.justice.govt.nz/tribunals/tenancy/rehearings-appeals https://www.justice.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Forms/TT-Application-for-rehearing.pdf https://www.justice.govt.nz/tribunals/tenancy/rehearings-appeals/ https://www.justice.govt.nz/fines/about-civil-debt/ https://www.tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions https://www.tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions http://www.tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions/

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5164051 8

A manaomia nisi faamatalaga poo se fesoasoani, e uiga i lau mataupu, asiasi ifo le matou aupega tafailagi: tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions, pe fesootai mai le Tenancy Services i le numera [PHONE].

Reasons: