What is the process a meth inspector takes? Made with funding from NZ On Air.
A woman whose home was found with traces of methamphetamine has been ordered to pay for testing costs at the property - despite being found not personally responsible for contamination.
Nichanun Suntharat will have to pay a total of $659.19 to her landlord, Rentals.co.nz Ltd and Critical Path, for costsrelated to checks of her Northland rental home for meth and the subsequent cleaning required.
The order was made in a Tenancy Tribunal decision late last month.
Suntharat moved into the property on June 22, 2018, and lived there for more than a year before her tenancy ended last November.
Before she moved in, testing for the class A drug was carried out at the Whāngārei property on June 1. Results from that initial test came back positive for meth at a level of 0.84mg per 100cm2.
A Northland tenant has been ordered to pay for meth testing at her rental home despite being found not personally responsible. File Photo / Mike Scott
On October 21 last year - more than a year into the tenancy - another test was carried out at the property.
As a result, nine samples came back positive for methamphetamine; with traces found in the dining room and kitchen, the toilet and entrance and in two bedrooms.
This time, the meth level found had increased; with results for five samples in two bedrooms ranging from 0.90mg in one room to 18.63mg in the other.
SOMEONE ELSE APPEARED TO BE LIVING AT PROPERTY BEFOREHAND
Documents for the decision show the tenant was "genuinely shocked" at the results found while she and her family were living at the property.
Suntharat put her own worries forward to the Tribunal - explaining that she had had concerns at the beginning of the tenancy; including that there was a "chemical smell" at the house.
Other concerns she shared were that a lock on a bedroom door was broken and that she was not provided with a key to the garage.
"It appeared that someone had been living in the garage," she told the Tribunal.
Because of those concerns, Suntharat said she had considered moving out of the house, but was already in a fixed term tenancy.
Suntharat, who owns a local restaurant, said the only people who stayed at the house while she was there were her parents and two or three chefs on work visas and who were therefore subject to regular health checks.
"Having heard from Ms Suntharat, I am satisfied that she was not personally responsible for the methamphetamine contamination and she had absolutely no knowledge of any methamphetamine use at the premises during her tenancy," the tenancy adjudicator, N Blake, said.
The property was in Regent, Whāngārei. Image / Google
"My finding is that Ms Suntharat did not use or intentionally permit the premises to be used for unlawful purposes. Therefore, the claim for exemplary damages is dismissed."
The tribunal found that there were only two "reasonable explanations" for the significant increase in meth contamination found at the property - that it happened during the brief period of vacancy before Suntharat moved in and that it happened during the tenancy.
"Although Ms Suntharat expressed some concerns about the security of the garage at the beginning of the tenancy, there is no access from the garage into the house itself," Blake noted.
"Several people lived in the property during Ms Suntharat's tenancy. [She] has a busy working life and she could not be at the property during work hours.
"Therefore, I find that it is proven that contamination occurred during Ms Suntharat's tenancy."
Just over $2500 is due to be paid out to Suntharat's landlord - $659.19 of which she must pay.
