Jong v Beevers Real Estate

[2013] QCAT 90

CITATION: Jong v Beevers Real Estate [2013] QCAT 90

PARTIES:	Ms Heerak Jong
(Applicant)
v
Beevers Real Estate
(Respondents)

APPLICATION NUMBER: MCDT651-12

MATTER TYPE: Residential tenancy matters

HEARING DATE:	28 May 2012 (Part heard)
29 August 2012 (Part heard)

HEARD AT:	Brisbane
DECISION OF:	Tammy Williams, Adjudicator

DELIVERED ON: 18 February 2013

DELIVERED AT: Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:

1.    The applicant pay forthwith to the respondent the sum of $1,600 being partial compensation and rent arrears for the period 21 to 28 January 2012; and

2.    The Residential Tenancy Authority release to the respondent the sum of $1,600 in full satisfaction of the Tribunal’s order.

CATCHWORDS:

MINOR CIVIL DISPUTE – RESIDENTIAL TENANCY – section 429 general dispute between lessor and tenant about a general tenancy agreement – where applicant claims rental bond upon completion of obligations arising from the Residential Tenancy Agreement – where respondent claims compensation for cleaning and damage to property and rental arrears.

Felton and Anor v Raine and Horne Real Estate [2011] QCATA 330

Residential Tenancies and Rooming Accommodation Act 2008, ss 188, 277

REASONS FOR DECISION

Introduction

1. The issue in dispute is whether the applicant is entitled to a full bond refund of $1,600.

2. The applicant filed a claim for the return of the bond. The respondent real estate filed a counter-application, arguing the applicant tenant failed to return the property in a similar condition in which it was originally leased and seeks compensation for the following items:

   ·        Cleaning - $380.00;

   ·        Replacement of light bulb - $64.00;

   ·        Replacement of the letterbox - $25.96;

   ·        Water damage to the vanity basin - $890.00;

   ·        Rental arrears - $405.00.

3. Although the total compensation sought is $1,764.96, the respondent is prepared to accept the bond ($1600.00) in full satisfaction.

Compensation for Cleaning

1. The applicant, Ms Jong rented the property for approximately two and a half years.

2. The applicant asserts she ‘left the premises in the same condition it was in when I moved in except for fair wear and tear’. Ms Jong believes the respondent is trying to take advantage of her because she is an international student.

3. There is a general statutory requirement pursuant to s 188 of the Residential Tenancies and Rooming Accommodation Act 2008 for tenants to leave the premises, as far as possible, in the same condition at the start of the tenancy fair wear and tear expected.

4. However, the wording of both sub-ss (2)-(3) limits the liability of a tenant, in so far as:

   ·Section 188(2) requires the premises and inclusions to be clean, by having regard to its condition at the start of the tenancy [emphasis added]; and

   ·Section 188(4) requires the tenant at the end of the tenancy, to leave the premises and inclusions, as far as possible, in the same condition they were at the start of the tenancy, fair wear and tear excepted [emphasis added].

5. Thus for a lessor to successfully establish the liability of a tenant pursuant to ss 188(2)-(3),…