What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5170951 about?

The tribunal order states: All party names and identifying details are suppressed.

How much money was awarded in case 5170951?

Break Lease Fee: $402.50 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $419.75 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $6,187.14 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Cutlery: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $552.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5170951?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5170951?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11988135-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5170951 about?

The tribunal order states: All party names and identifying details are suppressed.

How much money was awarded in case 5170951?

Break Lease Fee: $402.50 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $419.75 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $6,187.14 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Cutlery: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $552.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5170951?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5170951?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11988135-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5170951 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5170951 — net $4,848.39 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 12/3/25	$6,187.14	Rent arrears to 12/3/25
Cleaning	$419.75	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$552.00	Rubbish removal
Break lease fee	$402.50	Break lease fee
Replace furnishings: cutlery	$100.00	Replace furnishings: cutlery
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$4,848.39
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,848.39

Both parties attended the hearing. [The landlord’s representative] represented the landlord.

The hearing was adjourned on 10 June for the purposes of the parties filing further evidence; they have now done so.

The landlord has made the following claims: a. Rent arrears, b. Cleaning, c. Belonging removal, d. Missing chattels, e. Break lease fee, and f. Reimbursement of the filing fee.

[The tenant/s] consents to these claims other than the missing chattels. I therefore discuss that claim below.

[The tenant/s] wishes the Tribunal to take into account the dire financial and emotional situation he faced towards the end of the tenancy but accepts he is liable for these costs. Whilst [The tenant/s]’s difficult circumstances are acknowledged, the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) does not allow the Tribunal to take into account financial hardship when amounts are found owing due to breaches under the RTA.

I make the above noted orders by consent. The bond was released on 10 June to the landlord to go towards this debt.

[The tenant/s] also makes a cross claim relating to an alleged breach of the Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) 2019 (HHS) with respect to the dryer. I therefore discuss this claim below as well.

Before I discuss the outstanding claims, I note that the burden of proof lies with the applicant of each claim. They are required to prove their claim to the balance of probabilities, or what is more likely than not.

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

Pursuant to section 40(1)(e)(v) of the RTA, at the end of the tenancy a tenant must leave all chattels provided for their benefit. The landlord says that a hedgehog statue and cutlery set was missing.

[The tenant/s] objects to the claims saying no chattel list was provided at the outset. He makes no specific comment about the cutlery but says he does not have the hedgehog.

The landlord has provided evidence that there was a cutlery set at the beginning of the tenancy and was not at the end. They seek $250 being the cost to replace the set.

I find it established in evidence that the cutlery set was removed from the property during the tenancy for which the landlord should be compensated. I do not however find the amount claimed reasonable.

The owners have not yet replaced the missing cutlery and so have not yet incurred the replacement cost. Depreciation must also be taken into account as a landlord should not be better off for a tenant breach. There is no evidence on the age of the utensils, but I accept they were of better quality.

Having consider the evidence available to me, I find that an award of $100 is reasonable and just in the circumstances.

Did the landlord provide a HHS compliant home?

[The tenant/s]’s claim is that the dryer provided with the tenancy produced excessive moisture which rendered the home HHS incompliant, particularly with reference to the moisture ingress standard. He says he complained about it regularly however it was not replaced during the tenancy. This he says created an unhealthy home environment.

[The landlord’s representative] says the home is HHS compliant and refers to the HHS statement attached to the tenancy agreement. She says the dryer was functioning but agrees it was an older style dryer. She priced up a replacement however the options available were too heavy for the wall and so it was not practical to have it replaced.

[The landlord’s representative] also provided evidence that the owner resided in the apartment before and after this tenancy and did not experience excessive moisture in their use of the dryer.

The HHS moisture ingress and drainage standard requires that buildings comprising residential tenancies must have efficient systems to drain storm water, surface water and ground water, and that includes gutters, downpipes and drains. The Standard also requires a ground moisture barrier when there is an enclosed subfloor space.

The HHS does not relate to chattels that produce excessive moisture.

Further, the landlord has provided a HHS compliance statement with the tenancy agreement. There is no evidence to contradict the accuracy of this statement. Therefore, I find that the home was compliant with the HHS.

The Housing Improvement Regulations 1947 (the Regulations) requires that every house shall be free of dampness. 1 Section 45(1)(c) of the RTA states that landlords must comply with the Regulations. 1 Regulation 15

The evidence does not establish that the home was excessively damp or that the dryer was producing excessive moisture and/or malfunctioning which would be a maintenance issue.

Accordingly, I do not find it established that the landlord has breached section 45 of the RTA, and the claim must be dismissed. Other orders

Because [The landlord/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Because a majority of the orders were made by consent and given [The tenant/s]’s health issues, it is appropriate that all party identifying details are suppressed from the published order; see section 95A RTA.

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5170951 — net $4,848.39 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 12/3/25	$6,187.14	Rent arrears to 12/3/25
Cleaning	$419.75	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$552.00	Rubbish removal
Break lease fee	$402.50	Break lease fee
Replace furnishings: cutlery	$100.00	Replace furnishings: cutlery
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$4,848.39
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,848.39