What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5152318 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 5152318?

Cleaning: $250.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $75.14 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $174.04 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $850.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $162.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $6,462.86 awarded to landlord; Replace Curtain: $92.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $219.05 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5152318?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5152318?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11751843-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5152318 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 5152318?

Cleaning: $250.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $75.14 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $174.04 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $850.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $162.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $6,462.86 awarded to landlord; Replace Curtain: $92.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $219.05 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5152318?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5152318?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11751843-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5152318 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5152318 — net $5,992.09 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$6,462.86	Rent arrears
Water rates	$219.05	Water rates
Cleaning	$250.00	Cleaning
Lawns and Garden work: tree replacement	$174.04	Lawns and Garden work: tree replacement
Lawns and Garden work: rubbish removal	$75.14	ll generally accept for a landlord’s labour costs. The tenant is ordered to pay $75.14.
Insurance excess on carpet replacement	$850.00	cement of the carpet in the bedroom was $1,530.69. The tenant is ordered to pay $850.00, being the insurance excess on the claim.
Repairs	$162.00	epairs. I have amended the landlord’s labour charge and order the tenant to pay $162.00.
Replace curtain	$92.00	Replace curtain
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$5,992.09
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,992.09

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name and identifying details.
Lata I Moana Lonitenisi must pay [The landlord/s] $5,992.09 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,320.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not attend the hearing.
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 and water rates?

The tenancy ended on 4 March 2025. The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy was $6,462.86 for rent and $219.05 for water rates.

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 leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. The landlord explained the condition of the premises at the end of the tenancy and provided a breakdown of the work carried out by the landlord at a charged rate of $25.00 per hour.
In Ace Property Management v Owens (DC Wellington, CIV-2008-085-14441, 17 December 2008) the District Court said: A tenant’s obligation pursuant to the Act to leave a property in a “reasonably clean and reasonably tidy condition” does not mean that it will necessarily be up to a standard that a landlord may consider for a new tenant. It is a mistake for landlords to confuse those two matters.
The RTA 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; not on the subjective opinions of the landlord and tenant. There is no scientific way to determine what is reasonably clean and tidy, and the Tribunal must evaluate the evidence available, and in particular inspection reports and photographs.
The standard will vary according to the age and condition of the premises: the better the premises, the higher the standard. Surfaces that are new and in a good condition will be easier to clean than older and worn surfaces, particularly painted surfaces. Generally, tenants are not required to return premises any cleaner than they were at the start of the tenancy (Westwood v Western, DC Otahuhu, TT 2539/93 and 2540/93, 4 November 1994).
The landlord explained that the premises had been relet after this tenancy had ended. The cleaning claim includes all cleaning carried out by the landlord between the tenancies. The Tribunal generally considers that further cleaning will be required by the landlord to bring the premises to the standard where they can be relet. The standard required of tenants is reasonably clean and tidy, not the higher standard required of premises at the commencement of a tenancy. I have accordingly reduced the landlord’s claim of $387.00 to $250.00.
The landlord explained that the gardens had been overgrown and rubbish was left at the premises. The claim is proven, but I have reduced the hourly rate claimed to $25.00 per hour, a rate which the Tribunal will generally accept for a landlord’s labour costs. The tenant is ordered to pay $75.14.
Three trees were removed during the course of the tenancy. The costs to replace the mature trees and replant them is ordered at $174.04, which includes a reduction in the landlord’s labour cost.
The landlord discovered at the end of the tenancy that a curtain had been removed. The landlord was able to source a cheaper alternative by installing a roller blind at $92.00. A receipt was provided in evidence.
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.
Where the damage is careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.
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. The landlord is insured. The policy of insurance carries an excess of $850.00. The excess is referred to in the tenancy agreement.
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.
Damage is intentional where a person intends to cause damage and takes the necessary steps to achieve that purpose. Damage is also intentional where a person does something, or allows a situation to continue, knowing that damage is a certainty. See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.
The following damage was caused during the tenancy: Carpet in the master bedroom was stained and smelt strongly of dog urine. Photos were provided in evidence by the landlord. The tenant kept two dogs at the premises. The carpet was unable to be satisfactorily cleaned. The incidents of staining were not so frequent as to indicate that this was an intentional act by the tenant. The carpet was 3.5 years old. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The quote for replacement of the carpet in the bedroom was $1,530.69. The tenant is ordered to pay $850.00, being the insurance excess on the claim. Floors and doors were damaged. Photos were provided which indicate areas where the tenant’s dogs had caused damage by scratching and biting. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage The landlord carried out the repairs. I have amended the landlord’s labour charge and order the tenant to pay $162.00.
The amounts ordered are proved.
As [The applicant/s] have substantially succeeded with the claim I have ordered the tenant to reimburse the filing fee.
The landlord applied for name suppression. The landlord has been substantially successful in this matter and suppression of the landlords’ names and details is ordered.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5152318 — net $5,992.09 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$6,462.86	Rent arrears
Water rates	$219.05	Water rates
Cleaning	$250.00	Cleaning
Lawns and Garden work: tree replacement	$174.04	Lawns and Garden work: tree replacement
Lawns and Garden work: rubbish removal	$75.14	ll generally accept for a landlord’s labour costs. The tenant is ordered to pay $75.14.
Insurance excess on carpet replacement	$850.00	cement of the carpet in the bedroom was $1,530.69. The tenant is ordered to pay $850.00, being the insurance excess on the claim.
Repairs	$162.00	epairs. I have amended the landlord’s labour charge and order the tenant to pay $162.00.
Replace curtain	$92.00	Replace curtain
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$5,992.09
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,992.09

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name and identifying details.
Lata I Moana Lonitenisi must pay [The landlord/s] $5,992.09 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,320.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not attend the hearing.
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 and water rates?

The tenancy ended on 4 March 2025. The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy was $6,462.86 for rent and $219.05 for water rates.

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 leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. The landlord explained the condition of the premises at the end of the tenancy and provided a breakdown of the work carried out by the landlord at a charged rate of $25.00 per hour.
In Ace Property Management v Owens (DC Wellington, CIV-2008-085-14441, 17 December 2008) the District Court said: A tenant’s obligation pursuant to the Act to leave a property in a “reasonably clean and reasonably tidy condition” does not mean that it will necessarily be up to a standard that a landlord may consider for a new tenant. It is a mistake for landlords to confuse those two matters.
The RTA 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; not on the subjective opinions of the landlord and tenant. There is no scientific way to determine what is reasonably clean and tidy, and the Tribunal must evaluate the evidence available, and in particular inspection reports and photographs.
The standard will vary according to the age and condition of the premises: the better the premises, the higher the standard. Surfaces that are new and in a good condition will be easier to clean than older and worn surfaces, particularly painted surfaces. Generally, tenants are not required to return premises any cleaner than they were at the start of the tenancy (Westwood v Western, DC Otahuhu, TT 2539/93 and 2540/93, 4 November 1994).
The landlord explained that the premises had been relet after this tenancy had ended. The cleaning claim includes all cleaning carried out by the landlord between the tenancies. The Tribunal generally considers that further cleaning will be required by the landlord to bring the premises to the standard where they can be relet. The standard required of tenants is reasonably clean and tidy, not the higher standard required of premises at the commencement of a tenancy. I have accordingly reduced the landlord’s claim of $387.00 to $250.00.
The landlord explained that the gardens had been overgrown and rubbish was left at the premises. The claim is proven, but I have reduced the hourly rate claimed to $25.00 per hour, a rate which the Tribunal will generally accept for a landlord’s labour costs. The tenant is ordered to pay $75.14.
Three trees were removed during the course of the tenancy. The costs to replace the mature trees and replant them is ordered at $174.04, which includes a reduction in the landlord’s labour cost.
The landlord discovered at the end of the tenancy that a curtain had been removed. The landlord was able to source a cheaper alternative by installing a roller blind at $92.00. A receipt was provided in evidence.
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.
Where the damage is careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.
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. The landlord is insured. The policy of insurance carries an excess of $850.00. The excess is referred to in the tenancy agreement.
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.
Damage is intentional where a person intends to cause damage and takes the necessary steps to achieve that purpose. Damage is also intentional where a person does something, or allows a situation to continue, knowing that damage is a certainty. See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.
The following damage was caused during the tenancy: Carpet in the master bedroom was stained and smelt strongly of dog urine. Photos were provided in evidence by the landlord. The tenant kept two dogs at the premises. The carpet was unable to be satisfactorily cleaned. The incidents of staining were not so frequent as to indicate that this was an intentional act by the tenant. The carpet was 3.5 years old. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The quote for replacement of the carpet in the bedroom was $1,530.69. The tenant is ordered to pay $850.00, being the insurance excess on the claim. Floors and doors were damaged. Photos were provided which indicate areas where the tenant’s dogs had caused damage by scratching and biting. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage The landlord carried out the repairs. I have amended the landlord’s labour charge and order the tenant to pay $162.00.
The amounts ordered are proved.
As [The applicant/s] have substantially succeeded with the claim I have ordered the tenant to reimburse the filing fee.
The landlord applied for name suppression. The landlord has been substantially successful in this matter and suppression of the landlords’ names and details is ordered.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5152318 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5152318 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

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 and water rates?

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