Thomas & Douglas v Wang & Bian

[2007] ACTRTT 22

AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

RESIDENTIAL TENANCIES TRIBUNAL

CITATION:THOMAS & DOUGLAS V WANG & BIAN [2007] ACTRTT 22 (25 July 2007)

RT 165of 2007

Catchwords:

Issues:Bond

Legislation:Residential Tenancies Act 1997 (ACT)

Tribunal:Ms J Lennard, Member

Date:             25 July 2007

AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY                   )

RESIDENTIAL TENANCIES TRIBUNAL               )          NO: RT 165 of 2007

RE:     KELLY THOMAS & KIMBERLY DOUGLAS

(Applicant/tenant)

AND:  Y L WANG & S S BIAN

(Respondent/lessor)

DECISION

Tribunal  :          Ms J Lennard, Member

Date  :          25 July 2007

Decision  :          13^th April 2007

1. That the Office of Rental Bonds is directed to release the Bond of $1,420.00 as follows;

a.$384.10 to the lessor

b.The balance of the bond monies to the tenants

1. That the abovementioned amount is to be paid forthwith.

…………………………….

Member

AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY                   )
RESIDENTIAL TENANCIES TRIBUNAL               )          NO: RT 165 of 2007

RE: KELLY THOMAS & KIMBERLY DOUGLAS

(Applicant/tenant)

AND:  Y L WANG & S S BIAN

(Respondent/lessor)

REASONS FOR DECISION

25 July 2007  Ms J Lennard, Member

RE: Premises at 10 KRICHAUFF STREET PAGE  ACT 2614

1. The applicants were the tenants, and the respondents the lessors, of premises at 10 Krichauff Street Page, ACT. The residential tenancy agreement ended on 16 February when the tenants vacated the premises. The lessors conducted a final inspection on 17 February 2007.
2. The applicants were the tenants, and the respondents the lessors, of premises at the tenancy commenced on 17 March 2006 and the tenants paid a bond of $1420 to the lessors. It appears that this money was not paid directly to the Office of Rental Bonds but mingled with the lessors’ own funds until 8 May 2006 when Mr Wang paid this amount to the ORB using his credit card.
3. On 19 February 2007 the lessors emailed the tenants stating that they claimed an amount of $240.95 being made up of:
1. $70 for the garden and the fallen leaves not removed and for leaves placed in the rubbish bin
2. $50 for damage to the range hood and cleaning
3. $50 for cleaning the windows and the sills and
4. $70.95 for an outstanding water bill.
4. The email stated that if the tenants did not pay this amount by 21 February professionals would be called in and the charges would be greater.
5. The tenants made application to the Tribunal for the resolution of the dispute. The tenants stated in their application that they believed that the whole bond should be released to them because they had cleaned the house and garden the day they vacated and new tenants had moved in the next day. The tenants asserted that the lessors had not in fact incurred any costs in relation to cleaning or repair of the premises.
6. The lessor provided photographic evidence of the state of the garden, the range hood and of the windows. They also provided receipts for the removal of the leaves at a cost of $143 by Jim’s Mowing and for cleaning of the kitchen and windows at a cost of $110 from Weldon’s Domestic Cleaning.
7. The RTT also viewed a handwritten condition report prepared by the tenant at the commencement of the tenancy.

8. Taking into account all the evidence the RTT concluded:

1. That the tenants had received the premises and garden in a fair to good condition;
2. That the garden was returned to the lessor in substantially the same condition. In the photographs supplied by the lessor there were leaves evident on the garden beds, but they were not on the paths and there appeared to be no good reason to pay to have them removed. There was no evidence that the tenants used all of the garden area, for the premises also contained a separate granny flat. The tenants asserted that they were not permitted to access all areas within the garden. Further the lessor did not engage workmen to do this work until 2 March 2007, after new tenants had occupied the premises for two weeks.
3. That tenant was liable to compensate the lessor for damage beyond fair wear and tear to the range hood. The condition report noted ‘lean on range hood’. Both parties agreed that the fan was in working order at the beginning of the tenancy. The photographic evidence showed that the front panel of the hood had become detached. The lessor gave evidence that the range hood fan no longer operated and had to be replaced. The range hood was approximately 3.5 years old. The lessor provided quotes for the cost of a new range hood and its installation. The Tribunal allowed 70% of the replacement costs and 100% of the labour costs, a total of $289.10 compensation to be paid by the tenant to the lessor.
4.  The tenants had not left the windows in substantially the same state of cleanliness as at the beginning of the tenancy and the lessor had incurred costs in having them cleaned. The receipt for cleaning was $110, but included some cleaning of the kitchen. The tenants were liable for an amount of $95 for the cleaning of the windows.
5. The lessor had not incurred any loss in relation the leaves deposited in the garbage bin and so the RTT makes no finding or order in relation to it.
8. Having determined that the tenants were liable to pay the above amounts by way of compensation to the lessor the RTT made the following order:

The Bond of $1420 is to be released as follows:

1) $384.10 to the lessors
2) Balance to the tenants.

JANN LENNARD
MEMBER
25 JULY 2007