[ad_1]
Liz McDonald/Stuff
After her tenants caused “extensive damage”, a landlord was awarded $3304 by the Tenancy Tribunal. (File photo)
The night after her tenants moved out, a landlord discovered her rental property had been vandalised with paint.
The landlord was awarded $3304 after a Tenancy Tribunal hearing where she claimed compensation for extensive damage, abandoned items and tenants who overstayed their agreed tenancy.
At the October hearing, adjudicator Michael Brennan heard that Justine Amy Murdoch’s tenancy on Stoke’s Derby St was meant to end by mutual agreement on June 29.
However, the home remained occupied until July 1.
READ MORE:
* Tenant who took toilet seat and door ordered to pay
* Tenants to pay for ‘incredibly high’ levels of meth contamination
* Tribunal rejects compo claims as tenants can’t be found
“A lack of communication from the tenant left the landlord unsure of their intentions and concerned,” Brennan said.
The landlord started enforcement proceedings, but by the time these were enacted the tenant had moved out.
Speaking on Murdoch’s behalf at the hearing, her partner Cameron Smith said they had needed longer to move out. However, the adjudicator did not accept this, given the state in which the tenants left the house.
“I do not see evidence of the anticipated repairs that were flagged by the landlord as required when the parties mutually agreed on 29 June 2022 as the end date. The failure to vacate was intentional,” Brennan said.
Brennan awarded compensation for “extensive damage” at the property, as well as the removal of rubbish and abandoned items at the property, including a caravan.
The night after the tenants vacated the home, there was a “deliberate paint attack” on the property, the ruling said.
A neighbour told the landlord that Smith was the culprit, but a police report gave conflicting information, and Smith claimed he was with his partner and child that night.
“The lack of subsequent police action reflects the difficulty in proving Mr Smith was the vandal, even to the civil standard,” Brennan noted, adding that the neighbour had not been questioned as part of the tribunal proceedings.
Although this meant the landlord unable to claim for damage via the tribunal, they were able to recoup costs via their insurer, Brennan noted.
The landlord was granted name suppression and awarded $3304, $2120 of which will come from the tenant’s bond.
[ad_2]
Source link