[ad_1]
0
Envirocheck forensic consultants clean up a meth-tainted property in Auckland in 2011. (File photo)
The Leasing Court has ruled that two Pleasant Point tenants do not need to pay their former landlord exemplary damages for “significant” methamphetamine contamination, but must pay $ 4,022.70 for the property’s methamphetamine test.
In a decision published earlier this month, adjudicator J Talbot ruled while Anthony James Brooking and Dani Hodges, tenants at Harris St, Pleasant Point, did not have to pay exemplary damages to landlord Colin Imrie, as the adjudicator was not convinced of If the contamination “arose from any intentional act on the part of the tenant (s),” they were ordered to pay to have a methamphetamine test done.
The court ruling says that the landlord originally gave notice of the termination of the lease in early November 2019. Then, in early October, the landlord asked tenants about persons unknown to the landlord who were occupying the premises.
The tenants responded on October 9, telling the landlord that they had already vacated the premises two days earlier and that the other people on the property were doing cleaning work. The owner then contacted those people and allowed them to stay a few more days.
READ MORE:
* Social media post ‘love a good blaze’ by Auckland tenant used as evidence of drug use
* The police do not have to inform landlords about raids on their rentals
* Tenant smokes and manufactures methamphetamine in landlord’s rental yard
The landlord visited the premises on October 22 and found the house unoccupied, but “damaged and untidy,” according to the ruling.
The landlord then had the building tested for methamphetamine.
The ruling stated that “it was reasonable for the owner to test the premises for methamphetamine, as the police had been concerned about the activities at the premises to the extent that they had entered the premises in the presence of armed officers.”
“In testing, significant contamination was found.”
The tenants submitted to the court that no methamphetamine-related activity occurred while they were present on the property.
The decision said that the “high levels” of contamination found did not “sufficiently prove that the contamination occurred over a long period of time, so the tenant (s) must have been present.”
“There is no evidence of any instructions or permission given by the tenant (s) to the other occupants to use the premises for any illegal purpose.”
Supplied / Stuff
Carpet and base laid outside a property being treated for methamphetamine contamination in 2016 (File photo).
While the tenants were not ordered to pay exemplary damages, they were ordered to pay for the property to be tested for methamphetamine, as the judge ruled that they were liable to the landlord for the actions of the other people who occupied the property. after they left.
Tenants were also ordered to pay the landlord $ 1061.75 for other property damage, including a damaged garage door opener switch, removed security lights, damaged sliding door bolt, and a driveway damaged by the “presence of many screws, nuts, bolts and glass fragments ”, according to the ruling.
The landlord was ordered to pay the tenant $ 50 to get rid of a car body and tires that were left on the property after the tenant had left, without first contacting the tenant.
In accordance with the Residential Leasing Act, the landlord must make all reasonable efforts to communicate with a tenant about the property left after the lease has ended.
The tenant also unsuccessfully requested compensation of $ 3,500 for an alarm system that was installed on the property without the knowledge of the owner.
