What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5106848 about?

The tribunal order states: Jeanine Clarkin must pay Colliers New Zealand Limited As Agent For Land

How much money was awarded in case 5106848?

Compensation: Inadequate Heating: $1,600.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: Loss Of Amenity: $500.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $2,185.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $11,692.77 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $2,225.25 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5106848?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5106848?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12511681-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5106848 about?

The tribunal order states: Jeanine Clarkin must pay Colliers New Zealand Limited As Agent For Land

How much money was awarded in case 5106848?

Compensation: Inadequate Heating: $1,600.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: Loss Of Amenity: $500.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $2,185.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $11,692.77 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $2,225.25 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5106848?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5106848?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12511681-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

23 Waikare Road, Oneroa, Waiheke Island 1081 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5106848 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

23 Waikare Road, Oneroa, Waiheke Island 1081 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5106848 — Rent arrears | TenantCheck

Claims & awards

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

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5106848 — net $14,003.02 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears	$11,692.77		Rent arrears
Rubbish removal including car removal	$2,225.25		Rubbish removal including car removal
Repairs	$2,185.00		Repairs
Compensation: Loss of amenity		$500.00	Loss of amenity
Compensation: Inadequate heating		$1,600.00	Inadequate heating
Total award	$16,103.02	$2,100.00
Net award	$14,003.02
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$14,003.02

Claims and awards for application 5106848 — net $14,003.02 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears

Amount: $11,692.77
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears

Rubbish removal including car removal

Amount: $2,225.25
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal including car removal

Repairs

Amount: $2,185.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs

Compensation: Loss of amenity

Amount: $500.00
Awarded to: Tenant
Reason: Loss of amenity

Compensation: Inadequate heating

Amount: $1,600.00
Awarded to: Tenant
Reason: Inadequate heating

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Compensation Property damage Rent arrears Rubbish Removal

Order

Jeanine Clarkin must pay Colliers New Zealand Limited As Agent For Land Information New Zealand $14,003.02 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The landlord attended the hearing, set down to be conducted via video. A call to the tenant was answered and she joined the hearing that way.
This was a continuation hearing. This matter first aired on 19 March 2025 when an extended termination order was made. That order also provided for the late tenant counter claim to be heard at the next hearing, along with final rent arrears. The next hearing was conducted on 29 July after both parties had both sought an adjournment that was granted. That 29 July order adjourned further to allow the tenant to remove an abandoned car and to allow the landlord claims for repair and disposal costs to be confirmed.
This hearing considered the final compensation claims of the landlord after concluding the tenant claims and rent arrears previously. The final sum sought by the landlord was a significant reduction from the previous quote, reflecting some synergies from other work pending.
The landlord sought rent arrears and compensation. Its application was lodged on 13 December 2024.
The tenant counter-claimed, seeking compensation. Her application was lodged on 14 April 2025.
The issue of evidence at Tenancy Tribunal hearings was considered by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02. Judge Mather stated: “...[the applicant] needs to be reminded that like anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or a Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.”
In the decision that follows I may not have referred to all the oral testimony and other evidence presented during the three hearings, but the parties should know it has been considered. Background
The premises was first occupied by the tenant under a two-year Licence to Occupy (Office of Treaty Settlements premises) effective 22 October 2012. It extended. The licence provided for residential use in the dwelling and the old Police Station to be used as an “art studio/writer’s retreat”. The rent was set at $500.00 but reduced in June 2013 to $450.00.
In February 2018 the landlord ended the Licence to Occupy, replacing it with a residential tenancy agreement. A copy of that new agreement was provided to the tenant but never signed or returned. That letter noted rent arrears was $3,250.00 to 4 March 2018. Rent was noted as being, and continuing, at $450.00 per week. It remained at that amount until the end of the tenancy.
A notice to vacate the old Police Station (not the dwelling) was served on 16 October 2024, ending the arrangement on 14 November 2024.
The landlord previously provided two skips for the tenant to use for disposal of rubbish and items. The invoiced cost of $2,159.25 was absorbed by the landlord.
The tenancy ended 22 June 2025. Landlord claims
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 22 June 2025. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.
Rent arrears fluctuated during the tenancy with significant arrears over time shown in the rent summary. In the tenant application she acknowledged she was currently in arears but stated she intended to recover that in a timely manner if the tenancy could continue. Some lump sum payments were made, and the rent arrears did reduce in the later part of the tenancy.
The final rent arrears of $11,692.77 is awarded.

How much compensation is claimed?

The landlord initially sought $5,130.15 for repairs and $9,125.25 for the removal of rubbish and abandoned items. The final costs were yet to be finalised. The tenant was given a final opportunity to remove the car but that was not done.
During the adjourned period these claims were revised downwards to the following (note the total claimed does not reflect the sum of each item cost – here the line item cost has been adopted, reducing the $4,462.00 total to $4,410.25):

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, return all keys and security devices, and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The tenant did not remove all items and rubbish. The cost, including the removal of the car was revised downwards to $2,225.25. This is considered reasonable given the photographic evidence supplied that establishes a significant volume to be removed.
The amounts ordered are proved.

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.
“Fair wear” is deterioration caused by the reasonable use of the premises. “Fair tear” is deterioration caused by the ordinary operation of the forces of nature. Importantly, intentional or careless damage are not fair wear and tear. The landlord must prove that damage is beyond fair wear and tear for compensation.
The following damage was caused during the tenancy and compensation as itemised was sought. Window repairs (door glass/window)$402.50 Bedroom 1 - patching and plastering of two holes$230.00 Bedroom 2 - patching and plastering of two holes. Patching of a hole in the floor. $460.00 Bathroom - repair broken shower wall with a hole in it. Replace one sheet of ceretone. $862.50 Kitchen/Dining - Patching and plastering of holes$230.00
The damage was evidenced by photos. The claims are proven as more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The total of $2,185.00 for repairs is awarded. Tenant claims
The tenant sought “7- 10% of rent discount as compensation due to the loss of comfort over for a 24-month period.”
There were two main claims, one being a lack of heating in the main dwelling, and the second being a loss of amenity through a failure to maintain the art studio roof/guttering.
It is well settled that, the landlord’s obligation under s 45 RTA is to investigate and repair a defect brought to its attention within a timeframe which is reasonable in the circumstances, and as to what that time is, depends on the gravity of the problem but also on the objective attempts made by the landlord to investigate, and put right, whatever the problem might be.
Furthermore, a tenant has a statutory duty to advise of any defects under section 40(1)(d) RTA. Therefore, a tenant should promptly notify a landlord of any defects and a landlord should be given a reasonable opportunity to remedy the defect before being liable for any failure to do so. One aspect of this tenancy was delayed or minimal notice from the tenant regarding issues. Fireplace
In October 2022, a routine chimney sweep was carried out as scheduled. The tenant said the contractor advised her not to use the fireplace. Notes from the contractor at that time were later provided to the tenant. It noted:
The procedure for such contactor feedback to the landlord was explained at the hearing. Normally, such advice would be relayed to TPS – a local service provider engaged by the landlord – who would then communicate with the landlord to resolve. In this instance, there is no clear evidence of this occurring, but a file note made shortly after the October 2022 visit records replacement parts were not available. No further action to repair, or replace it if irreparable, took place. This leaves open a conclusion that some advice regarding the need to repair or replacement was received. No further action was taken for reasons that appear more oversight than intentional.
Such a problem would not be a major issue during the summer period then. However, the tenant went without a fireplace for the remainder of the tenancy, most significantly during the 2.5 winter seasons ahead. While the tenant did not actively pursue a remedy, I consider the landlord was aware of the problem and should have taken appropriate steps to repair or replace.
I have considered the seasonal impact of such a loss on the tenant and have settled on $50 compensation per week for an estimated 32 weeks of weather where the lack of heating will have adversely impacted the tenant and other occupants. I award $1,600 compensation for this failure to maintain. Art studio/old Police Station
There was a failure to remedy the roof and guttering at this building (not the dwelling). Photos of the ensuing damage was provided. An assessment of the roof and guttering took place in October 2023.
The actual right for the tenant is have the continued use of this building was disputed. The landlord instructed the tenant to remove her possessions from that building and not use the old police station anymore on or around 11 November 2024. The landlord claims there was some continued use by the tenant after this.
I have considered the submissions and evidence regarding this issue I have and determined the tenant should be compensated a one-off sum of $500.00 for any loss of amenity here. Merits and justice
When considering claims, the Tribunal must consider s 85 RTA which provides that the Tribunal shall determine a dispute according to the substantial merits and justice of the case and in doing so, shall have regard for the law but shall not be bound to give legal effect to strict legal rights or obligations or to legal forms or technicalities. This provision recognises that, although applying established legal principles will generally produce a fair result, there are circumstances where it will not. In this situation, the Tribunal is entitled to depart from the strict application of the law to achieve a just outcome. Equally, where the law is uncertain, the Tribunal may adapt an approach that best meets the merits and justice of the case.
Both parties have failed in meeting all of their responsibilities or obligations during this long tenancy. The tenant has consistently failed to pay rent as due over a very long period. Rent has remained static over the long tenancy. Some silence or lack of urgency from the tenant in pursuing remedies from the landlord for issues as they arose may have been, at least in part, due to this.
After considering both applications, the long tenancy and terms, as well as the poor condition after vacating, the final monetary order appears fair. Suppression
Section 95A RTA states regarding suppression orders that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published.
Further, the Tribunal may, on the application of any party to proceedings or on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that all or part of the evidence given or the name or any identifying particulars of any witness or party not be published.
The tenant requested suppression in her application. Such suppression is not automatic given the determination here and I see no special reason to justify any exercise of my initiative and order it. The request for suppression is declined. Filing fees
As each party has had some success, I leave each to carry their respective filing fees.

Claims & awards

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

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5106848 — net $14,003.02 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears	$11,692.77		Rent arrears
Rubbish removal including car removal	$2,225.25		Rubbish removal including car removal
Repairs	$2,185.00		Repairs
Compensation: Loss of amenity		$500.00	Loss of amenity
Compensation: Inadequate heating		$1,600.00	Inadequate heating
Total award	$16,103.02	$2,100.00
Net award	$14,003.02
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$14,003.02

Claims and awards for application 5106848 — net $14,003.02 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears

Amount: $11,692.77
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears

Rubbish removal including car removal

Amount: $2,225.25
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal including car removal

Repairs

Amount: $2,185.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs

Compensation: Loss of amenity

Amount: $500.00
Awarded to: Tenant
Reason: Loss of amenity

Compensation: Inadequate heating

Amount: $1,600.00
Awarded to: Tenant
Reason: Inadequate heating

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Compensation Property damage Rent arrears Rubbish Removal

Order

Jeanine Clarkin must pay Colliers New Zealand Limited As Agent For Land Information New Zealand $14,003.02 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The landlord attended the hearing, set down to be conducted via video. A call to the tenant was answered and she joined the hearing that way.
This was a continuation hearing. This matter first aired on 19 March 2025 when an extended termination order was made. That order also provided for the late tenant counter claim to be heard at the next hearing, along with final rent arrears. The next hearing was conducted on 29 July after both parties had both sought an adjournment that was granted. That 29 July order adjourned further to allow the tenant to remove an abandoned car and to allow the landlord claims for repair and disposal costs to be confirmed.
This hearing considered the final compensation claims of the landlord after concluding the tenant claims and rent arrears previously. The final sum sought by the landlord was a significant reduction from the previous quote, reflecting some synergies from other work pending.
The landlord sought rent arrears and compensation. Its application was lodged on 13 December 2024.
The tenant counter-claimed, seeking compensation. Her application was lodged on 14 April 2025.
The issue of evidence at Tenancy Tribunal hearings was considered by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02. Judge Mather stated: “...[the applicant] needs to be reminded that like anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or a Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.”
In the decision that follows I may not have referred to all the oral testimony and other evidence presented during the three hearings, but the parties should know it has been considered. Background
The premises was first occupied by the tenant under a two-year Licence to Occupy (Office of Treaty Settlements premises) effective 22 October 2012. It extended. The licence provided for residential use in the dwelling and the old Police Station to be used as an “art studio/writer’s retreat”. The rent was set at $500.00 but reduced in June 2013 to $450.00.
In February 2018 the landlord ended the Licence to Occupy, replacing it with a residential tenancy agreement. A copy of that new agreement was provided to the tenant but never signed or returned. That letter noted rent arrears was $3,250.00 to 4 March 2018. Rent was noted as being, and continuing, at $450.00 per week. It remained at that amount until the end of the tenancy.
A notice to vacate the old Police Station (not the dwelling) was served on 16 October 2024, ending the arrangement on 14 November 2024.
The landlord previously provided two skips for the tenant to use for disposal of rubbish and items. The invoiced cost of $2,159.25 was absorbed by the landlord.
The tenancy ended 22 June 2025. Landlord claims
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 22 June 2025. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.
Rent arrears fluctuated during the tenancy with significant arrears over time shown in the rent summary. In the tenant application she acknowledged she was currently in arears but stated she intended to recover that in a timely manner if the tenancy could continue. Some lump sum payments were made, and the rent arrears did reduce in the later part of the tenancy.
The final rent arrears of $11,692.77 is awarded.

How much compensation is claimed?

The landlord initially sought $5,130.15 for repairs and $9,125.25 for the removal of rubbish and abandoned items. The final costs were yet to be finalised. The tenant was given a final opportunity to remove the car but that was not done.
During the adjourned period these claims were revised downwards to the following (note the total claimed does not reflect the sum of each item cost – here the line item cost has been adopted, reducing the $4,462.00 total to $4,410.25):

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, return all keys and security devices, and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The tenant did not remove all items and rubbish. The cost, including the removal of the car was revised downwards to $2,225.25. This is considered reasonable given the photographic evidence supplied that establishes a significant volume to be removed.
The amounts ordered are proved.

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.
“Fair wear” is deterioration caused by the reasonable use of the premises. “Fair tear” is deterioration caused by the ordinary operation of the forces of nature. Importantly, intentional or careless damage are not fair wear and tear. The landlord must prove that damage is beyond fair wear and tear for compensation.
The following damage was caused during the tenancy and compensation as itemised was sought. Window repairs (door glass/window)$402.50 Bedroom 1 - patching and plastering of two holes$230.00 Bedroom 2 - patching and plastering of two holes. Patching of a hole in the floor. $460.00 Bathroom - repair broken shower wall with a hole in it. Replace one sheet of ceretone. $862.50 Kitchen/Dining - Patching and plastering of holes$230.00
The damage was evidenced by photos. The claims are proven as more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The total of $2,185.00 for repairs is awarded. Tenant claims
The tenant sought “7- 10% of rent discount as compensation due to the loss of comfort over for a 24-month period.”
There were two main claims, one being a lack of heating in the main dwelling, and the second being a loss of amenity through a failure to maintain the art studio roof/guttering.
It is well settled that, the landlord’s obligation under s 45 RTA is to investigate and repair a defect brought to its attention within a timeframe which is reasonable in the circumstances, and as to what that time is, depends on the gravity of the problem but also on the objective attempts made by the landlord to investigate, and put right, whatever the problem might be.
Furthermore, a tenant has a statutory duty to advise of any defects under section 40(1)(d) RTA. Therefore, a tenant should promptly notify a landlord of any defects and a landlord should be given a reasonable opportunity to remedy the defect before being liable for any failure to do so. One aspect of this tenancy was delayed or minimal notice from the tenant regarding issues. Fireplace
In October 2022, a routine chimney sweep was carried out as scheduled. The tenant said the contractor advised her not to use the fireplace. Notes from the contractor at that time were later provided to the tenant. It noted:
The procedure for such contactor feedback to the landlord was explained at the hearing. Normally, such advice would be relayed to TPS – a local service provider engaged by the landlord – who would then communicate with the landlord to resolve. In this instance, there is no clear evidence of this occurring, but a file note made shortly after the October 2022 visit records replacement parts were not available. No further action to repair, or replace it if irreparable, took place. This leaves open a conclusion that some advice regarding the need to repair or replacement was received. No further action was taken for reasons that appear more oversight than intentional.
Such a problem would not be a major issue during the summer period then. However, the tenant went without a fireplace for the remainder of the tenancy, most significantly during the 2.5 winter seasons ahead. While the tenant did not actively pursue a remedy, I consider the landlord was aware of the problem and should have taken appropriate steps to repair or replace.
I have considered the seasonal impact of such a loss on the tenant and have settled on $50 compensation per week for an estimated 32 weeks of weather where the lack of heating will have adversely impacted the tenant and other occupants. I award $1,600 compensation for this failure to maintain. Art studio/old Police Station
There was a failure to remedy the roof and guttering at this building (not the dwelling). Photos of the ensuing damage was provided. An assessment of the roof and guttering took place in October 2023.
The actual right for the tenant is have the continued use of this building was disputed. The landlord instructed the tenant to remove her possessions from that building and not use the old police station anymore on or around 11 November 2024. The landlord claims there was some continued use by the tenant after this.
I have considered the submissions and evidence regarding this issue I have and determined the tenant should be compensated a one-off sum of $500.00 for any loss of amenity here. Merits and justice
When considering claims, the Tribunal must consider s 85 RTA which provides that the Tribunal shall determine a dispute according to the substantial merits and justice of the case and in doing so, shall have regard for the law but shall not be bound to give legal effect to strict legal rights or obligations or to legal forms or technicalities. This provision recognises that, although applying established legal principles will generally produce a fair result, there are circumstances where it will not. In this situation, the Tribunal is entitled to depart from the strict application of the law to achieve a just outcome. Equally, where the law is uncertain, the Tribunal may adapt an approach that best meets the merits and justice of the case.
Both parties have failed in meeting all of their responsibilities or obligations during this long tenancy. The tenant has consistently failed to pay rent as due over a very long period. Rent has remained static over the long tenancy. Some silence or lack of urgency from the tenant in pursuing remedies from the landlord for issues as they arose may have been, at least in part, due to this.
After considering both applications, the long tenancy and terms, as well as the poor condition after vacating, the final monetary order appears fair. Suppression
Section 95A RTA states regarding suppression orders that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published.
Further, the Tribunal may, on the application of any party to proceedings or on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that all or part of the evidence given or the name or any identifying particulars of any witness or party not be published.
The tenant requested suppression in her application. Such suppression is not automatic given the determination here and I see no special reason to justify any exercise of my initiative and order it. The request for suppression is declined. Filing fees
As each party has had some success, I leave each to carry their respective filing fees.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5106848 — Rent arrears at 23 Waikare Road, Oneroa, Waiheke Island 1081

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5106848 — Rent arrears at 23 Waikare Road, Oneroa, Waiheke Island 1081

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

How much compensation is claimed?

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

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

How much is owed for rent?

How much compensation is claimed?

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

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions