How much money was awarded in case 5103808?

Aircon Remote: $30.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $10.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $7,380.00 awarded to landlord; Bedroom Door And Hole In Lounge: $1,248.90 awarded to landlord; Entrance Door Glass Panel: $215.00 awarded to landlord; Sliding Door Panels: $1,113.75 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5103808?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage, Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5103808?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11577764-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5103808?

Aircon Remote: $30.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $10.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $7,380.00 awarded to landlord; Bedroom Door And Hole In Lounge: $1,248.90 awarded to landlord; Entrance Door Glass Panel: $215.00 awarded to landlord; Sliding Door Panels: $1,113.75 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5103808?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage, Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5103808?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11577764-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5103808 — Rent arrears

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5103808 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5103808 — net $8,284.65 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 17/02/2025	$7,380.00	Rent arrears to 17/02/2025
Oven/stove cleaning	$10.00	Oven/stove cleaning
Aircon remote	$30.00	the air conditioner remote controller battery cover. I order the tenant to pay $30.00 as compensation.
Repairs: Sliding door panels	$1,113.75	aged during the tenancy and were taken by the tenant. I order the tenant to pay $1,113.75 as compensation.
Repairs: bedroom door and hole in lounge	$1,248.90	Repairs: bedroom door and hole in lounge
Repairs: Entrance door glass panel	$215.00	Repairs: Entrance door glass panel
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$8,284.65
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$8,284.65

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the names and identifying details of both parties.

[The tenant/s] must pay [The landlord/s] $8,284.65 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,740.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 5 th March 2025.

Before the hearing, the tenants confirmed that both [The tenant/s] were the tenants to this tenancy.

The tenant has applied for reduction of the fixed-term tenancy that was due to end on 17 th February 2025.

The landlord made a cross-application for rent arrears, compensation, and refund of the bond.

I deal with the tenant’s application first. Tenant’s application

The Tribunal may reduce a fixed term tenancy where: a. there has been an unforeseen change in the applicant’s circumstances; and b. there would be severe hardship to the applicant if the term is not reduced; and c. the applicant’s hardship would be greater than the hardship to the other party if the term is reduced. See section 66(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).

There has been an unforeseen change in the tenant's circumstances. Mr Roberts was made redundant from his job without any prior knowledge that that may occur.

The tenant would suffer severe hardship if the term of the tenancy were not reduced. The tenant was unable to afford paying the rent while redundant. The tenants also had to look after a newborn baby.

The landlord would suffer hardship if the term is reduced. The premises was mortgaged and the mortgage repayments were being met with the rental income. It was almost break even. Factoring in the rates and other associated costs, the rental would have been cashflow negative even with the weekly rent.

The tenants moved out on 21 st November 2025 and had been staying at another person’s house rent free. The landlord had to pay the mortgage from their own pocket.

I am unable to find that the tenant’s hardship would be greater than the landlord’s hardship. They are balanced. 5103808, 5089494, 5138528, 51571173

Therefore, I do not find that the tenant has proven that the tenant’s hardship would be greater than that of the landlord. I decline the tenant’s application to reduce the fixed-term tenancy.

The tenant also said that the landlord had agreed to release the tenants earlier than the original fixed-term end date. The landlord confirmed that they were willing to end the tenancy after 10 working days of the tenant having paid for the damages. The tenant did not pay for the damages and therefore the conditions to the conditional termination was never satisfied. I find that the tenant is liable for rent to the end of the original tenancy end date of 17 February 2025. Landlord’s cross-application

As I have found that the fixed-term tenancy was not reduced, I order the tenant to pay the landlord $7,380.00 for rent arrears to the end of the original tenancy date.

The landlord also sought compensation for damages done to the carpet, freezer shelf, blackout curtains, shower rail and shower head, bathroom apron, air condition remote, two sliding wardrobe panels, main bedroom door, hole in the lounge wall, kitchen benchtop, entrance door bottom glass pain, cleaning and rubbish removal.

For damage claims, the 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.

The Tribunal must also taken into account betterment and depreciation. 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. In calculating depreciation, the Tribunal must take into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.

I find that the carpet and blackout curtains were beyond their useful lifespan and had no value left in them at the end of the tenancy.

For shower rail and kitchen bench top, I find that they were fair wear and tear.

For rubbish removal, I accept that the bin was full due to the landlord or the landlord’s contractors having filled it up. Therefore, I decline this claim.

For bathroom apron chip, I do not find that the landlord has proven the damage to the required standard.

I accept there was some value left in freezer shelf. I order the tenant to pay the landlord $10.00 as a nominal amount. 5103808, 5089494, 5138528, 51571174

The tenant accepted having lost the air conditioner remote controller battery cover. I order the tenant to pay $30.00 as compensation.

The tenant accepted that two sliding wardrobe panels were damaged during the tenancy and were taken by the tenant. I order the tenant to pay $1,113.75 as compensation.

The tenant accepted having damaged the main bedroom door, architrave and the lounge wall. I order the tenant to pay the landlord $1,248.90 as compensation.

The tenant accepted responsibility for the entrance door bottom glass panel being broken. I order the tenant to pay the landlord $215.00 as compensation.

In relation to cleaning costs, I find that the premises was left reasonably clean and that cleaning would have been required post renovations. I do not award any cleaning costs even considering an oven tray that may needed cleaning.

Lastly, because the landlord has wholly succeeded with the claim, the tenant must also reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5103808 — net $8,284.65 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 17/02/2025	$7,380.00	Rent arrears to 17/02/2025
Oven/stove cleaning	$10.00	Oven/stove cleaning
Aircon remote	$30.00	the air conditioner remote controller battery cover. I order the tenant to pay $30.00 as compensation.
Repairs: Sliding door panels	$1,113.75	aged during the tenancy and were taken by the tenant. I order the tenant to pay $1,113.75 as compensation.
Repairs: bedroom door and hole in lounge	$1,248.90	Repairs: bedroom door and hole in lounge
Repairs: Entrance door glass panel	$215.00	Repairs: Entrance door glass panel
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$8,284.65
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$8,284.65

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the names and identifying details of both parties.
[The tenant/s] must pay [The landlord/s] $8,284.65 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,740.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 5 th March 2025.
Before the hearing, the tenants confirmed that both [The tenant/s] were the tenants to this tenancy.
The tenant has applied for reduction of the fixed-term tenancy that was due to end on 17 th February 2025.
The landlord made a cross-application for rent arrears, compensation, and refund of the bond.
I deal with the tenant’s application first. Tenant’s application
The Tribunal may reduce a fixed term tenancy where: a. there has been an unforeseen change in the applicant’s circumstances; and b. there would be severe hardship to the applicant if the term is not reduced; and c. the applicant’s hardship would be greater than the hardship to the other party if the term is reduced. See section 66(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
There has been an unforeseen change in the tenant's circumstances. Mr Roberts was made redundant from his job without any prior knowledge that that may occur.
The tenant would suffer severe hardship if the term of the tenancy were not reduced. The tenant was unable to afford paying the rent while redundant. The tenants also had to look after a newborn baby.
The landlord would suffer hardship if the term is reduced. The premises was mortgaged and the mortgage repayments were being met with the rental income. It was almost break even. Factoring in the rates and other associated costs, the rental would have been cashflow negative even with the weekly rent.
The tenants moved out on 21 st November 2025 and had been staying at another person’s house rent free. The landlord had to pay the mortgage from their own pocket.
I am unable to find that the tenant’s hardship would be greater than the landlord’s hardship. They are balanced. 5103808, 5089494, 5138528, 51571173
Therefore, I do not find that the tenant has proven that the tenant’s hardship would be greater than that of the landlord. I decline the tenant’s application to reduce the fixed-term tenancy.
The tenant also said that the landlord had agreed to release the tenants earlier than the original fixed-term end date. The landlord confirmed that they were willing to end the tenancy after 10 working days of the tenant having paid for the damages. The tenant did not pay for the damages and therefore the conditions to the conditional termination was never satisfied. I find that the tenant is liable for rent to the end of the original tenancy end date of 17 February 2025. Landlord’s cross-application
As I have found that the fixed-term tenancy was not reduced, I order the tenant to pay the landlord $7,380.00 for rent arrears to the end of the original tenancy date.
The landlord also sought compensation for damages done to the carpet, freezer shelf, blackout curtains, shower rail and shower head, bathroom apron, air condition remote, two sliding wardrobe panels, main bedroom door, hole in the lounge wall, kitchen benchtop, entrance door bottom glass pain, cleaning and rubbish removal.
For damage claims, the 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.
The Tribunal must also taken into account betterment and depreciation. 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. In calculating depreciation, the Tribunal must take into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.
I find that the carpet and blackout curtains were beyond their useful lifespan and had no value left in them at the end of the tenancy.
For shower rail and kitchen bench top, I find that they were fair wear and tear.
For rubbish removal, I accept that the bin was full due to the landlord or the landlord’s contractors having filled it up. Therefore, I decline this claim.
For bathroom apron chip, I do not find that the landlord has proven the damage to the required standard.
I accept there was some value left in freezer shelf. I order the tenant to pay the landlord $10.00 as a nominal amount. 5103808, 5089494, 5138528, 51571174
The tenant accepted having lost the air conditioner remote controller battery cover. I order the tenant to pay $30.00 as compensation.
The tenant accepted that two sliding wardrobe panels were damaged during the tenancy and were taken by the tenant. I order the tenant to pay $1,113.75 as compensation.
The tenant accepted having damaged the main bedroom door, architrave and the lounge wall. I order the tenant to pay the landlord $1,248.90 as compensation.
The tenant accepted responsibility for the entrance door bottom glass panel being broken. I order the tenant to pay the landlord $215.00 as compensation.
In relation to cleaning costs, I find that the premises was left reasonably clean and that cleaning would have been required post renovations. I do not award any cleaning costs even considering an oven tray that may needed cleaning.
Lastly, because the landlord has wholly succeeded with the claim, the tenant must also reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5103808 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5103808 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions