Tenantcheck Insights

Tenantcheck Insights · Case study

Tenancy Tribunal case 4938833 — Cleanliness at 4 Middleton Road, Kew, Dunedin 9012

Decided 26 Sept 2024 · Published 26 Sept 2024 · Application 4938833

Cleanliness

View official order on MoJ →Explore similar cases

At a glance

Key facts from the published tribunal order.

Location

Dunedin

Tribunal region

Adjudicator

R Armstrong

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Tenantcheck Insights · Case study

Tenancy Tribunal case 4938833 — Cleanliness at 4 Middleton Road, Kew, Dunedin 9012

Decided 26 Sept 2024 · Published 26 Sept 2024 · Application 4938833

Cleanliness

View official order on MoJ →Explore similar cases

At a glance

Key facts from the published tribunal order.

Location

Dunedin

Tribunal region

Adjudicator

R Armstrong

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

No individual claim amounts were reconciled for this order. View the official Ministry of Justice PDF for full detail.

Order

The application is dismissed.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $720.00 (6225883-003) to [The tenant/s] immediately.

Reasons

The hearing was conducted by telephone. Both parties attended. Sarah Griffiths represented the landlord.
The landlord claims cleaning and rubbish removal costs following the end of the tenancy. The tenant denies liability.
The landlord had no photographs showing the condition of the premises when the tenancy ended, and she could not give any direct evidence about it because she did not inspect the premises. Even if she had inspected, the Tribunal would expect to see photographs where the claim is disputed.
The tenant said that there was a lot of stuff in the basement of the premises at the start of the tenancy and he cleared some of it out so that he could use the space for storage. He denied that any of the stuff in the basement was his or was put there by him.
The landlord was unable to produce any evidence to contradict the tenant’s evidence.
The landlord has therefore been unable to prove its claims and so its application must be dismissed.
The tenant has not made any application for payment of the bond but he is plainly entitled to it and so I have ordered it to be paid to him. The Bond Centre will arrange the payment within the next few days.

Topics & place

Topics are dispute themes across the order (not the same as claim-type money lines).

Cleanliness Dunedin

Key findings

Dispute theme: cleaning

Property management

ROOT DOWN INVESTMENTS LIMITED (applicant)

Frequently asked questions

Common questions about this Tenancy Tribunal case.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4938833 about?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4938833?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4938833?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4938833?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10881053-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

No individual claim amounts were reconciled for this order. View the official Ministry of Justice PDF for full detail.

Order

The application is dismissed.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $720.00 (6225883-003) to [The tenant/s] immediately.

Reasons

The hearing was conducted by telephone. Both parties attended. Sarah Griffiths represented the landlord.
The landlord claims cleaning and rubbish removal costs following the end of the tenancy. The tenant denies liability.
The landlord had no photographs showing the condition of the premises when the tenancy ended, and she could not give any direct evidence about it because she did not inspect the premises. Even if she had inspected, the Tribunal would expect to see photographs where the claim is disputed.
The tenant said that there was a lot of stuff in the basement of the premises at the start of the tenancy and he cleared some of it out so that he could use the space for storage. He denied that any of the stuff in the basement was his or was put there by him.
The landlord was unable to produce any evidence to contradict the tenant’s evidence.
The landlord has therefore been unable to prove its claims and so its application must be dismissed.
The tenant has not made any application for payment of the bond but he is plainly entitled to it and so I have ordered it to be paid to him. The Bond Centre will arrange the payment within the next few days.

Topics & place

Topics are dispute themes across the order (not the same as claim-type money lines).

Cleanliness Dunedin

Key findings

Dispute theme: cleaning

Property management

ROOT DOWN INVESTMENTS LIMITED (applicant)

Frequently asked questions

Common questions about this Tenancy Tribunal case.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4938833 about?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4938833?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4938833?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4938833?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10881053-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.