What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5104046?

The tribunal order states: Zoey Tera and Francis Tawhi must pay Davendra Prasad Maharaj $3,811.03

How much money was awarded in case 5104046?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $486.32 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,285.71 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,012.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5104046?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5104046?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11674692-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5104046?

The tribunal order states: Zoey Tera and Francis Tawhi must pay Davendra Prasad Maharaj $3,811.03

How much money was awarded in case 5104046?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $486.32 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,285.71 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,012.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5104046?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5104046?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11674692-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

60 Dixon Road, Glenview, Hamilton 3206 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5104046 — Rent arrears

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5104046 — net $3,811.03 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears 20 October 2024 to 08 November 2024	$2,285.71	Rent arrears 20 October 2024 to 08 November 2024
Cleaning and rubbish removal	$1,012.00	Cleaning and rubbish removal
Lock/key replacement	$486.32	Lock/key replacement
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,811.03
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,811.03

The claims made by the landlord were filed on 11 December 2024 and initially set down for a telephone hearing on 14 March 2025. It is unclear whether the tenant appeared. The adjudicator dealing with the matter adjourned for a face-to- face hearing. Notices of the hearing were sent to both parties. The landlord has appeared, but the tenant has not. I am satisfied the tenant was served notice of hearing, and the matter has proceeded in their absence.

The landlord claims that: i. The tenant owes rent arrears from 20 October 2024 to 08 November 2024 of $2,285.71), ii. Failed to leave the property reasonably clean and tidy and remove all rubbish ($1,012.00), iii. Failed to return the keys ($486.32), iv. Failed to leave the lawns reasonably tidy ($150.00), v. Is liable for a bailiff’s eviction fee ($ 258.00)

In brackets next to the claims is the compensation sought.

The onus of proving these claims rests with the landlord. The standard required is on the balance of probabilities. The landlord must establish more likely than not that the tenant has breached the terms of the agreement or provisions of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (The “Act”). How much is owed for rent.

On 17 October 2024, the parties entered into a mediated agreement to end the tenancy on 20 October 2024. The tenant also agreed to pay rent arrears to that date and reimburse the landlord for gas charges. The landlord states that the tenant did not leave as agreed and also ceased paying rent. The landlord states that they engaged a bailiff and regained possession on 08 November 2024.

The landlord has produced a rent summary for the period concerned which proves the amount owing on 08 November 2024.

Regarding the bailiff’s fee. The mediated order was not a termination or conditional termination. Instead, the parties reached a mutual agreement to end the tenancy. The correct process would have been to seek a possession order from the Tribunal. On this basis, I decline to award the bailiff’s fee.

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

At the end of the tenancy the tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, remove all rubbish, and return all keys. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) of the Act.

The property has four bedrooms, bathroom, three separate toilets, kitchen, lounge / dining area, laundry, and double garage.

The Act does not require the premises to be provided or returned in a spotless or an immaculate condition. The standard is based on what an average bystander would consider reasonable, and not on the subjective opinions of the landlord and tenant. There is no scientific way to determine what is reasonably clean and tidy. Determining whether the tenant has failed to leave the property reasonably clean and tidy, and remove all rubbish, will involve an objective assessment. The Tribunal must evaluate the evidence available, and in particular inspection reports and photographs.

The landlord has provided both pre tenancy and end of tenancy photographs. I am satisfied that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The amount claimed covers both cleaning and rubbish removal, is reasonable in the circumstances, and awarded in full.

At the commencement of the tenancy, the tenant was provided with keys to the front door and a ranch slider. The landlord states that neither was returned. As a result, the landlord had the locks re keyed. The amount claimed is awarded.

Regarding the landlord’s claim for lawn mowing, there is insufficient evidence to support the claim and it is dismissed.

The landlord stated that they had additional damages claims. At the last hearing, the landlord was advised to provide details of any further claims in advance. This has not been done. I decline to amend the application today. If the landlord wishes to pursue other claims, they must file a separate application. Costs

Because Davendra Prasad Maharaj has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. Name suppression.

The landlord does not seek name suppression, and no orders are made.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5104046 — net $3,811.03 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears 20 October 2024 to 08 November 2024	$2,285.71	Rent arrears 20 October 2024 to 08 November 2024
Cleaning and rubbish removal	$1,012.00	Cleaning and rubbish removal
Lock/key replacement	$486.32	Lock/key replacement
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,811.03
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,811.03

Order

Zoey Tera and Francis Tawhi must pay Davendra Prasad Maharaj $3,811.03 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The claims made by the landlord were filed on 11 December 2024 and initially set down for a telephone hearing on 14 March 2025. It is unclear whether the tenant appeared. The adjudicator dealing with the matter adjourned for a face-to- face hearing. Notices of the hearing were sent to both parties. The landlord has appeared, but the tenant has not. I am satisfied the tenant was served notice of hearing, and the matter has proceeded in their absence.
The landlord claims that: i. The tenant owes rent arrears from 20 October 2024 to 08 November 2024 of $2,285.71), ii. Failed to leave the property reasonably clean and tidy and remove all rubbish ($1,012.00), iii. Failed to return the keys ($486.32), iv. Failed to leave the lawns reasonably tidy ($150.00), v. Is liable for a bailiff’s eviction fee ($ 258.00)
In brackets next to the claims is the compensation sought.
The onus of proving these claims rests with the landlord. The standard required is on the balance of probabilities. The landlord must establish more likely than not that the tenant has breached the terms of the agreement or provisions of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (The “Act”). How much is owed for rent.
On 17 October 2024, the parties entered into a mediated agreement to end the tenancy on 20 October 2024. The tenant also agreed to pay rent arrears to that date and reimburse the landlord for gas charges. The landlord states that the tenant did not leave as agreed and also ceased paying rent. The landlord states that they engaged a bailiff and regained possession on 08 November 2024.
The landlord has produced a rent summary for the period concerned which proves the amount owing on 08 November 2024.
Regarding the bailiff’s fee. The mediated order was not a termination or conditional termination. Instead, the parties reached a mutual agreement to end the tenancy. The correct process would have been to seek a possession order from the Tribunal. On this basis, I decline to award the bailiff’s fee.

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

At the end of the tenancy the tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, remove all rubbish, and return all keys. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) of the Act.
The property has four bedrooms, bathroom, three separate toilets, kitchen, lounge / dining area, laundry, and double garage.
The Act does not require the premises to be provided or returned in a spotless or an immaculate condition. The standard is based on what an average bystander would consider reasonable, and not on the subjective opinions of the landlord and tenant. There is no scientific way to determine what is reasonably clean and tidy. Determining whether the tenant has failed to leave the property reasonably clean and tidy, and remove all rubbish, will involve an objective assessment. The Tribunal must evaluate the evidence available, and in particular inspection reports and photographs.
The landlord has provided both pre tenancy and end of tenancy photographs. I am satisfied that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The amount claimed covers both cleaning and rubbish removal, is reasonable in the circumstances, and awarded in full.
At the commencement of the tenancy, the tenant was provided with keys to the front door and a ranch slider. The landlord states that neither was returned. As a result, the landlord had the locks re keyed. The amount claimed is awarded.
Regarding the landlord’s claim for lawn mowing, there is insufficient evidence to support the claim and it is dismissed.
The landlord stated that they had additional damages claims. At the last hearing, the landlord was advised to provide details of any further claims in advance. This has not been done. I decline to amend the application today. If the landlord wishes to pursue other claims, they must file a separate application. Costs
Because Davendra Prasad Maharaj has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. Name suppression.
The landlord does not seek name suppression, and no orders are made.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5104046 — Rent arrears at 60 Dixon Road, Glenview, Hamilton 3206

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5104046 — Rent arrears at 60 Dixon Road, Glenview, Hamilton 3206

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions