What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5087048 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the parties’ names and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 5087048?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 5087048 D…: $2,489.11 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $649.50 awarded to landlord; Carpet: $793.72 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5087048?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5087048?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12002659-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5087048 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the parties’ names and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 5087048?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 5087048 D…: $2,489.11 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $649.50 awarded to landlord; Carpet: $793.72 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5087048?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5087048?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12002659-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5087048 — Property damage

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5087048 — net $3,959.33 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Previous order application 5087048 dated 09/04/2025	$2,489.11	Previous order application 5087048 dated 09/04/2025
Repairs: Carpet	$793.72	Repairs: Carpet
Oven/Stove repair	$649.50	Oven/Stove repair
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,959.33
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,959.33

Order

The Tribunal orders suppression of the parties’ names and identifying details.
[The tenant/s] must pay [The landlord/s] $3,959.33, calculated as shown in the table below.
This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 9 April 2025 under the same application number.
The tenant must pay the debt in order 2 at the rate of $75.00 per week.
The first payment must be made on Tuesday 24 June 2025 and payments must continue ever Tuesday until the debt is paid in full.
If the tenant fails to make any payment within 2 working days of the due date, the balance of the debt owing will be payable immediately and can be enforced through the District Court. DescriptionLandlord Previous order application 5087048 dated 09/04/2025$2,489.11 Repairs: Carpet$793.72 Oven/Stove repair$649.50 Filing fee reimbursement$27.00 Total award$3,959.33 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$3,959.33

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing which took place by teleconference.
The landlord was represented by an agent who took over management at the end of this tenancy.
This one-bedroom unit had previously been rented by the tenant’s brother for approximately six months prior to [The tenant/s] moving in in about November 2023.
The parties entered into a tenancy agreement for this tenancy to commence on 24 April 2024.
The tenancy ended on 10 August 2024.
The landlord applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
On 9 April 2025 the Tribunal made an order relating to this tenancy, for rent arrears to 10 August 2024 and bond refund. The balance owed under the previous order after the bond refund is incorporated into this order for enforcement purposes.
The Tribunal adjourned the landlord damage repair claims for further evidence.
The landlord has filed an updated itemised invoice in respect of the repairs.
The landlord withdrew the claims in respect of the window and dishwasher repairs after hearing the tenant’s submissions.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

A landlord must prove that damage to the premises occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. If this is established, to avoid liability, the tenant must prove they did not carelessly or intentionally cause or permit the damage. Tenants are liable for the actions of people at the premises with their permission. See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA.
Where the damage is caused carelessly, and is covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to the lesser of the insurance excess or four weeks' rent (or four weeks' market rent in the case of a tenant paying income-related rent). See section 49B(3)(a) RTA.
Where the damage is careless and is not covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to four weeks' rent (or market rent). See section 49B(3)(b) RTA. Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. See section 49B(3A)(a) RTA.
Tenants are liable for the cost of repairing damage that is intentional or which results from any activity at the premises that is an imprisonable offence. This applies to anything the tenant does and anything done by a person they are responsible for. See section 49B(1) RTA.
The landlord claimed that damage was caused during the tenancy. The Tribunal will consider each claim in turn below.
The agent advised that the landlord does not have insurance.
Damage to carpet (a)The landlord claimed that the tenant damaged the carpet in particular that there was a strong smell which was claimed to be from a dog. The landlord provided the entry inspection report dated 24 April 2024 which the tenant belongings already in the premises and records the carpet as brand new together with several photos of the carpet taken at the end of the tenancy showing marks. (b)The tenant disputed the carpet was new at the commencement of her tenancy and stated it was there when her brother rented the premises. She accepted that some damage may have occurred as she had a three year old toilet training. However, she stated that there were also issues with the washing machine provided with the tenancy which didn’t work and overflowed contributing to the damage. The tenant stated that she did not have a dog but accepted she did dog sit on one occasion. (c)I have considered the evidence of both parties and the photographs provided. I accept the tenant’s evidence that the carpet was not brand new when her tenancy commenced in April 2024 as there are existing marks on the carpet in the entry photographs. I have also considered the tenant’s acceptance that some damage was caused during her tenancy and that there was a dog in the unit on one occasion and find that there has been some damage to the carpet beyond fair wear and tear. (d)The landlord has provided an invoice which itemises the amount of $1587.47 to remedy the carpet damage. Having considered all the factors and that the landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached their obligations, and should not be better or worse off I find it appropriate to order the tenant to reimburse half the costs being $793.72.
Replacement cooktop and oven and dishwasher repairs (a)The tenant accepts liability for damage to the cooktop and oven. (b)The landlord has produced an invoice for $845.00 which also includes work on the dishwasher. (c)The entry inspection report records that the dishwasher needs replacement and this was not done during the tenancy. Therefore I am not satisfied that the dishwasher claim is proved. (d)I have deducted one third of the labour cost plus the cost of the dishwasher rack totalling $149.50 (GST inc) from the amount ordered. (d)I have also depreciated the cost of the new cooktop $287.50 (GST inc). The Tribunal considers the lifetime of a cooktop to be a maximum of twelve years and the parties advised that this cooktop was almost two years old. Accordingly the amount of $46.00 is deducted. (e)The tenant is ordered to pay the sum of $649.50 for the oven/stove repairs.
Replacement front door handle and kitchen and wardrobe handles (a)The landlord provided an exit photograph of the front door handle area broken. The tenant claimed that the front door was damaged due to the lock failing and her being locked out. Her neighbour assisted her to gain entry. (b)The exit photographs provided record that a kitchen draw handle was missing and a missing wardrobe door handle, however, these handles are showing missing in the entry inspection photographs. (c)I find that the landlord has not proved on the balance of probabilities that the tenant is liable for damage to the door handles.
Repairs to walls (a)The landlord claimed that the tenant damaged walls in the premises and undertook a full repaint of the premises following the tenant’s exit. (b)Having considered the entry and exit reports I find that there was some damage to walls at the beginning of this tenancy and although there were some further marks at the end I am not satisfied on the limited exit photographs provided that this is beyond fair wear and tear. Suppression/Filing fee
The Tribunal may on the application of any party or on its own initiative make a suppression order, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest. Section 95A (4) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The applicant has applied for suppression. Having considered the factors in this case the Tribunal finds that the interests of the parties outweigh the public interest in their identities being published and grants suppression of all party details.
Because [The landlord/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5087048 — net $3,959.33 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Previous order application 5087048 dated 09/04/2025	$2,489.11	Previous order application 5087048 dated 09/04/2025
Repairs: Carpet	$793.72	Repairs: Carpet
Oven/Stove repair	$649.50	Oven/Stove repair
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,959.33
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,959.33

Order

The Tribunal orders suppression of the parties’ names and identifying details.
[The tenant/s] must pay [The landlord/s] $3,959.33, calculated as shown in the table below.
This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 9 April 2025 under the same application number.
The tenant must pay the debt in order 2 at the rate of $75.00 per week.
The first payment must be made on Tuesday 24 June 2025 and payments must continue ever Tuesday until the debt is paid in full.
If the tenant fails to make any payment within 2 working days of the due date, the balance of the debt owing will be payable immediately and can be enforced through the District Court. DescriptionLandlord Previous order application 5087048 dated 09/04/2025$2,489.11 Repairs: Carpet$793.72 Oven/Stove repair$649.50 Filing fee reimbursement$27.00 Total award$3,959.33 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$3,959.33

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing which took place by teleconference.
The landlord was represented by an agent who took over management at the end of this tenancy.
This one-bedroom unit had previously been rented by the tenant’s brother for approximately six months prior to [The tenant/s] moving in in about November 2023.
The parties entered into a tenancy agreement for this tenancy to commence on 24 April 2024.
The tenancy ended on 10 August 2024.
The landlord applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
On 9 April 2025 the Tribunal made an order relating to this tenancy, for rent arrears to 10 August 2024 and bond refund. The balance owed under the previous order after the bond refund is incorporated into this order for enforcement purposes.
The Tribunal adjourned the landlord damage repair claims for further evidence.
The landlord has filed an updated itemised invoice in respect of the repairs.
The landlord withdrew the claims in respect of the window and dishwasher repairs after hearing the tenant’s submissions.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

A landlord must prove that damage to the premises occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. If this is established, to avoid liability, the tenant must prove they did not carelessly or intentionally cause or permit the damage. Tenants are liable for the actions of people at the premises with their permission. See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA.
Where the damage is caused carelessly, and is covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to the lesser of the insurance excess or four weeks' rent (or four weeks' market rent in the case of a tenant paying income-related rent). See section 49B(3)(a) RTA.
Where the damage is careless and is not covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to four weeks' rent (or market rent). See section 49B(3)(b) RTA. Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. See section 49B(3A)(a) RTA.
Tenants are liable for the cost of repairing damage that is intentional or which results from any activity at the premises that is an imprisonable offence. This applies to anything the tenant does and anything done by a person they are responsible for. See section 49B(1) RTA.
The landlord claimed that damage was caused during the tenancy. The Tribunal will consider each claim in turn below.
The agent advised that the landlord does not have insurance.
Damage to carpet (a)The landlord claimed that the tenant damaged the carpet in particular that there was a strong smell which was claimed to be from a dog. The landlord provided the entry inspection report dated 24 April 2024 which the tenant belongings already in the premises and records the carpet as brand new together with several photos of the carpet taken at the end of the tenancy showing marks. (b)The tenant disputed the carpet was new at the commencement of her tenancy and stated it was there when her brother rented the premises. She accepted that some damage may have occurred as she had a three year old toilet training. However, she stated that there were also issues with the washing machine provided with the tenancy which didn’t work and overflowed contributing to the damage. The tenant stated that she did not have a dog but accepted she did dog sit on one occasion. (c)I have considered the evidence of both parties and the photographs provided. I accept the tenant’s evidence that the carpet was not brand new when her tenancy commenced in April 2024 as there are existing marks on the carpet in the entry photographs. I have also considered the tenant’s acceptance that some damage was caused during her tenancy and that there was a dog in the unit on one occasion and find that there has been some damage to the carpet beyond fair wear and tear. (d)The landlord has provided an invoice which itemises the amount of $1587.47 to remedy the carpet damage. Having considered all the factors and that the landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached their obligations, and should not be better or worse off I find it appropriate to order the tenant to reimburse half the costs being $793.72.
Replacement cooktop and oven and dishwasher repairs (a)The tenant accepts liability for damage to the cooktop and oven. (b)The landlord has produced an invoice for $845.00 which also includes work on the dishwasher. (c)The entry inspection report records that the dishwasher needs replacement and this was not done during the tenancy. Therefore I am not satisfied that the dishwasher claim is proved. (d)I have deducted one third of the labour cost plus the cost of the dishwasher rack totalling $149.50 (GST inc) from the amount ordered. (d)I have also depreciated the cost of the new cooktop $287.50 (GST inc). The Tribunal considers the lifetime of a cooktop to be a maximum of twelve years and the parties advised that this cooktop was almost two years old. Accordingly the amount of $46.00 is deducted. (e)The tenant is ordered to pay the sum of $649.50 for the oven/stove repairs.
Replacement front door handle and kitchen and wardrobe handles (a)The landlord provided an exit photograph of the front door handle area broken. The tenant claimed that the front door was damaged due to the lock failing and her being locked out. Her neighbour assisted her to gain entry. (b)The exit photographs provided record that a kitchen draw handle was missing and a missing wardrobe door handle, however, these handles are showing missing in the entry inspection photographs. (c)I find that the landlord has not proved on the balance of probabilities that the tenant is liable for damage to the door handles.
Repairs to walls (a)The landlord claimed that the tenant damaged walls in the premises and undertook a full repaint of the premises following the tenant’s exit. (b)Having considered the entry and exit reports I find that there was some damage to walls at the beginning of this tenancy and although there were some further marks at the end I am not satisfied on the limited exit photographs provided that this is beyond fair wear and tear. Suppression/Filing fee
The Tribunal may on the application of any party or on its own initiative make a suppression order, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest. Section 95A (4) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The applicant has applied for suppression. Having considered the factors in this case the Tribunal finds that the interests of the parties outweigh the public interest in their identities being published and grants suppression of all party details.
Because [The landlord/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5087048 — Property damage

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5087048 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions