What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5166433 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 5166433?

Cleaning: $940.01 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns And Load Fridge And Two Manual…: $120.00 awarded to landlord; Painting And Plastering Of Luciph'S…: $690.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Overpayment: $525.56 awarded to tenant; Replace Carpet And Underlay In Lucip…: $1,790.25 awarded to landlord; Replace Carpet In Smallest Upstairs…: $767.25 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $514.00 awarded to landlord; Skip Bin: $862.50 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $430.96 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5166433?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5166433?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12153432-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5166433 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 5166433?

Cleaning: $940.01 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns And Load Fridge And Two Manual…: $120.00 awarded to landlord; Painting And Plastering Of Luciph'S…: $690.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Overpayment: $525.56 awarded to tenant; Replace Carpet And Underlay In Lucip…: $1,790.25 awarded to landlord; Replace Carpet In Smallest Upstairs…: $767.25 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $514.00 awarded to landlord; Skip Bin: $862.50 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $430.96 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5166433?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5166433?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12153432-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5166433 — Cleanliness

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5166433 — net $5,616.41 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Water rates: 9 June to 18 December 2024	$430.96		4. The landlord has applied for water rates arrears, compensation, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
Cleaning	$940.01		Cleaning
Lawns and load fridge and two manual mowers into	$120.00		Lawns and load fridge and two manual mowers into
skip bin	$862.50		skip bin
Painting and plastering of Luciph's bedroom	$690.00		Painting and plastering of Luciph's bedroom
Rubbish removal	$514.00		Rubbish removal
Replace carpet and underlay in Luciph's room	$1,790.25		Replace carpet and underlay in Luciph's room
Replace carpet in smallest upstairs bedroom	$767.25		Replace carpet in smallest upstairs bedroom
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00		Filing fee reimbursement
Rent overpayment		$525.56	Rent overpayment
Total award	$6,141.97	$525.56
Net award	$5,616.41
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,616.41

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of [Tenant 1, 2 and 3’s] names and identifying details and the Landlord’s name and identifying details.
[Tenants 1, 2 and 3] and Luciph Barlow owe [The landlord] $2,576.41 (“the debt”), calculated as shown in table below.
The landlord has agreed to the tenants each taking liability for repayment of a quarter of the debt.
[Tenant 1] must pay the landlord $644.10 (one quarter of the debt) immediately.
[Tenant 2] must repay $644.10 (one quarter of the debt) as follows: a. By 21 weekly payments of $30.00 each Thursday, commencing on Thursday 31 July 2025 and ending on 25 December 2025; and b. A final payment of $14.10, to fully repay the debt, to be paid on Thursday 20 November 2025; and c. Where [Tenant 2’s] financial circumstances improve, he has agreed to contact the landlord to make arrangements to increase the weekly amounts payable or to pay lump sum payments to repay his portion of the debt faster.
If [Tenant 2] fails to pay any of these debt repayments within 2 working days of the due dates, the full amount of his remaining debt will fall due immediately.
[Tenant 3] must repay $644.10 (one quarter of the debt) as follows: a. By 21 weekly payments of $30.00 each Thursday, commencing on Thursday 31 July 2025 and ending on 25 December 2025; and b. A final payment of $14.10, to fully repay the debt, to be paid on Thursday 20 November 2025; and c. Where [Tenant 3’s] financial circumstances improve, he has agreed to contact the landlord to make arrangements to increase the weekly amounts payable or to pay lump sum payments to repay his portion of the debt faster.
If [Tenant 3] fails to pay any of these debt repayments within 2 working days of the due dates, the full amount of his remaining debt will fall due immediately.
Luciph Barlow must pay the landlord $644.10 (one quarter of the debt) immediately.

Reasons

The landlord and [Tenants 1, 2 and 3] attended the hearing.
Luciph Barlow did not appear at the hearing. I am satisfied that Luciph Barlow had received proper notice of the hearing time, date and place and chose not to attend.
The tenancy commenced on 8 January 2021 and ended on 18 December 2024. Tenant 1 confirmed that he moved out in mid to late November 2024 and the others moved out by 18 December 2024.
The landlord has applied for water rates arrears, compensation, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for water rates?

The tenancy ended on 18 December 2024. The landlord provided water rates invoices which prove the amount owing for the period 9 June to 18 December 2024. The tenants accepted liability for this debt.

Did the tenants 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 is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. Specifically: a. The lawns were last mown by Tenant 1 in mid-November 2024, a month before the other tenants moved out. The landlord did not produce photographs of the entire lawn before it was mown so I was unable to ascertain whether the $230.00 applied for were fair and reasonable. I am satisfied that the lawns with 4 weeks growth could be mown for $60.00 and the reasonable cost of having the fridge and two hand mowers placed into the skip bin being $60.00. This is a total award of $120.00; and b. The tenants agree that the premise was not left in a reasonably clean state and accepted liability for the $940.01 cleaning costs. It is noted that 70% of this cost is attributable to the extremely poor condition of Luciph Barlow’s room that was so untidy and unsanitary the piles of rubbish in it leached out and damaged the carpet and walls. There was mould that had accumulated on the walls and carpets from the room not being ventilated adequately. Residue from coke cans and bottles had leaked on to the carpet. Tenants 1 to 3 confirmed Luciph Barlow did not clean and tidy his room or ventilate it during the tenancy.
The amounts ordered are proved.

Are the tenants 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.
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: a. The carpet in Luciph Barlow’s room was extremely dirty and the landlord could not remove the stains with steam and spot cleaning, so the carpet and underlay had to be replaced; b. The carpet in the small room was also stained, could not be steam cleaned and had to be replaced; c. The wall in the downstairs bedroom (next to the garage) needed plastering and sanding and the wall, ceiling, window and door needed painting. The cost of this remedial work was $1,725.00. The tenants accept responsibility for half of this cost and have disproven liability for the damage caused by mouldy damp walls. I award $862.50 to the landlord in compensation for the damage attributable to the tenants; d. The tenants have disproven liability for the remedial work required to paint the upstairs room wall. It has been established by the evidence produced today that the mould is embedded in the wall and a layer of paint has come off with cleaning. There were no signs of holes in the wall after cleaning this mouldy area. The tenants have proven this room had a mould and dampness issue that they reported to the landlord and that was not investigated and remediated during the tenancy. I am satisfied that the evidence proves the tenants are not liable for this damage; and e. The damage to the walls in Luciph Barlow’s room (opposite the bathroom) were from LED light strips that damaged the paint when the lights were removed and from his poor living/cleaning habits, as he had stuff piled up against the wall and never ventilated the room. These living habits resulted in mould growing on the walls that required cleaning and sanding and repainting. I award $690.00 for the painting and plastering of these walls. of the walls.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenants have not disproved liability for these damages.
The landlord had insurance but the excess costs payable for the carpet and wall damage was more than the cost of the repairs. Therefore, the landlord did not make a claim.
The amounts ordered are proved.
I have considered 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, I have considered the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Reimbursement of filing fee
Section 102(4) of the RTA confirms that applicants that are wholly or substantially successful in proving their claims will have their filing fee reimbursed.
Because [The applicant] has substantially succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee. Name suppression
The landlord applies for non-publication of its name and identifying details.
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, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
The landlord has substantially succeeded in its proceedings. I do not consider publication is in the public interest or justified because of the landlord’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
Non-publication is ordered.
The tenants have also applied for non-publication of their names and identifying details.
The landlord has agreed to suppression of Tenant 1, 2 and 3’s names and identifying details but objects to Luciph Barlow’s name and identifying details being supressed as he is responsible for most of the damages sought, did not attend the hearing to accept responsibility for this damage and debts attributable to his sole careless acts and/or careless omissions are being disproportionately borne by the other three tenants.
I agree with the landlord and find that publication of Tenants 1, 2 and 3’s names are not in the public interest or justified because of their conduct in this matter. Non-publication of their names and identifying details are ordered.
I consider publication of Luciph Barlow’s name and identifying details is in the public interest or justified because of his conduct in this matter, in that the evidence shows he was careless in his treatment of his room, and he caused significant damage to the premise.
Luciph Barlow’s application for name suppression is dismissed for the reasons set out above.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5166433 — net $5,616.41 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Water rates: 9 June to 18 December 2024	$430.96		4. The landlord has applied for water rates arrears, compensation, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
Cleaning	$940.01		Cleaning
Lawns and load fridge and two manual mowers into	$120.00		Lawns and load fridge and two manual mowers into
skip bin	$862.50		skip bin
Painting and plastering of Luciph's bedroom	$690.00		Painting and plastering of Luciph's bedroom
Rubbish removal	$514.00		Rubbish removal
Replace carpet and underlay in Luciph's room	$1,790.25		Replace carpet and underlay in Luciph's room
Replace carpet in smallest upstairs bedroom	$767.25		Replace carpet in smallest upstairs bedroom
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00		Filing fee reimbursement
Rent overpayment		$525.56	Rent overpayment
Total award	$6,141.97	$525.56
Net award	$5,616.41
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,616.41

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of [Tenant 1, 2 and 3’s] names and identifying details and the Landlord’s name and identifying details.
[Tenants 1, 2 and 3] and Luciph Barlow owe [The landlord] $2,576.41 (“the debt”), calculated as shown in table below.
The landlord has agreed to the tenants each taking liability for repayment of a quarter of the debt.
[Tenant 1] must pay the landlord $644.10 (one quarter of the debt) immediately.
[Tenant 2] must repay $644.10 (one quarter of the debt) as follows: a. By 21 weekly payments of $30.00 each Thursday, commencing on Thursday 31 July 2025 and ending on 25 December 2025; and b. A final payment of $14.10, to fully repay the debt, to be paid on Thursday 20 November 2025; and c. Where [Tenant 2’s] financial circumstances improve, he has agreed to contact the landlord to make arrangements to increase the weekly amounts payable or to pay lump sum payments to repay his portion of the debt faster.
If [Tenant 2] fails to pay any of these debt repayments within 2 working days of the due dates, the full amount of his remaining debt will fall due immediately.
[Tenant 3] must repay $644.10 (one quarter of the debt) as follows: a. By 21 weekly payments of $30.00 each Thursday, commencing on Thursday 31 July 2025 and ending on 25 December 2025; and b. A final payment of $14.10, to fully repay the debt, to be paid on Thursday 20 November 2025; and c. Where [Tenant 3’s] financial circumstances improve, he has agreed to contact the landlord to make arrangements to increase the weekly amounts payable or to pay lump sum payments to repay his portion of the debt faster.
If [Tenant 3] fails to pay any of these debt repayments within 2 working days of the due dates, the full amount of his remaining debt will fall due immediately.
Luciph Barlow must pay the landlord $644.10 (one quarter of the debt) immediately.

Reasons

The landlord and [Tenants 1, 2 and 3] attended the hearing.
Luciph Barlow did not appear at the hearing. I am satisfied that Luciph Barlow had received proper notice of the hearing time, date and place and chose not to attend.
The tenancy commenced on 8 January 2021 and ended on 18 December 2024. Tenant 1 confirmed that he moved out in mid to late November 2024 and the others moved out by 18 December 2024.
The landlord has applied for water rates arrears, compensation, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for water rates?

The tenancy ended on 18 December 2024. The landlord provided water rates invoices which prove the amount owing for the period 9 June to 18 December 2024. The tenants accepted liability for this debt.

Did the tenants 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 is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. Specifically: a. The lawns were last mown by Tenant 1 in mid-November 2024, a month before the other tenants moved out. The landlord did not produce photographs of the entire lawn before it was mown so I was unable to ascertain whether the $230.00 applied for were fair and reasonable. I am satisfied that the lawns with 4 weeks growth could be mown for $60.00 and the reasonable cost of having the fridge and two hand mowers placed into the skip bin being $60.00. This is a total award of $120.00; and b. The tenants agree that the premise was not left in a reasonably clean state and accepted liability for the $940.01 cleaning costs. It is noted that 70% of this cost is attributable to the extremely poor condition of Luciph Barlow’s room that was so untidy and unsanitary the piles of rubbish in it leached out and damaged the carpet and walls. There was mould that had accumulated on the walls and carpets from the room not being ventilated adequately. Residue from coke cans and bottles had leaked on to the carpet. Tenants 1 to 3 confirmed Luciph Barlow did not clean and tidy his room or ventilate it during the tenancy.
The amounts ordered are proved.

Are the tenants 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.
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: a. The carpet in Luciph Barlow’s room was extremely dirty and the landlord could not remove the stains with steam and spot cleaning, so the carpet and underlay had to be replaced; b. The carpet in the small room was also stained, could not be steam cleaned and had to be replaced; c. The wall in the downstairs bedroom (next to the garage) needed plastering and sanding and the wall, ceiling, window and door needed painting. The cost of this remedial work was $1,725.00. The tenants accept responsibility for half of this cost and have disproven liability for the damage caused by mouldy damp walls. I award $862.50 to the landlord in compensation for the damage attributable to the tenants; d. The tenants have disproven liability for the remedial work required to paint the upstairs room wall. It has been established by the evidence produced today that the mould is embedded in the wall and a layer of paint has come off with cleaning. There were no signs of holes in the wall after cleaning this mouldy area. The tenants have proven this room had a mould and dampness issue that they reported to the landlord and that was not investigated and remediated during the tenancy. I am satisfied that the evidence proves the tenants are not liable for this damage; and e. The damage to the walls in Luciph Barlow’s room (opposite the bathroom) were from LED light strips that damaged the paint when the lights were removed and from his poor living/cleaning habits, as he had stuff piled up against the wall and never ventilated the room. These living habits resulted in mould growing on the walls that required cleaning and sanding and repainting. I award $690.00 for the painting and plastering of these walls. of the walls.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenants have not disproved liability for these damages.
The landlord had insurance but the excess costs payable for the carpet and wall damage was more than the cost of the repairs. Therefore, the landlord did not make a claim.
The amounts ordered are proved.
I have considered 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, I have considered the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Reimbursement of filing fee
Section 102(4) of the RTA confirms that applicants that are wholly or substantially successful in proving their claims will have their filing fee reimbursed.
Because [The applicant] has substantially succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee. Name suppression
The landlord applies for non-publication of its name and identifying details.
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, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
The landlord has substantially succeeded in its proceedings. I do not consider publication is in the public interest or justified because of the landlord’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
Non-publication is ordered.
The tenants have also applied for non-publication of their names and identifying details.
The landlord has agreed to suppression of Tenant 1, 2 and 3’s names and identifying details but objects to Luciph Barlow’s name and identifying details being supressed as he is responsible for most of the damages sought, did not attend the hearing to accept responsibility for this damage and debts attributable to his sole careless acts and/or careless omissions are being disproportionately borne by the other three tenants.
I agree with the landlord and find that publication of Tenants 1, 2 and 3’s names are not in the public interest or justified because of their conduct in this matter. Non-publication of their names and identifying details are ordered.
I consider publication of Luciph Barlow’s name and identifying details is in the public interest or justified because of his conduct in this matter, in that the evidence shows he was careless in his treatment of his room, and he caused significant damage to the premise.
Luciph Barlow’s application for name suppression is dismissed for the reasons set out above.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5166433 — Cleanliness

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5166433 — Cleanliness

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for water rates?

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

Are the tenants 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 water rates?

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

Are the tenants responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions