How much money was awarded in case 5177392?

Cleaning: $207.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $345.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $610.79 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 5177392 D…: $1,884.29 awarded to landlord; Holes In Walls: $141.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Clothesline: $330.00 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: curtains lounge…: $550.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Oven: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $315.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $240.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,040.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5177392?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5177392?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12060093-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5177392?

Cleaning: $207.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $345.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $610.79 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 5177392 D…: $1,884.29 awarded to landlord; Holes In Walls: $141.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Clothesline: $330.00 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: curtains lounge…: $550.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Oven: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $315.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $240.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,040.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5177392?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5177392?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12060093-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

5 Kowai Street, Leithfield, Leithfield 7481 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5177392 — Property damage

Q: What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5177392?

The tribunal order states: Nathan David Colville must pay Morris And Co Property Management Limited

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5177392 — net $4,230.08 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Previous order application 5177392 dated 29/04/2025	$1,884.29	Previous order application 5177392 dated 29/04/2025
Replace furnishings: curtains lounge & bedroom	$550.00	Replace furnishings: curtains lounge & bedroom
Replace furnishings: oven	$100.00	Replace furnishings: oven
Rubbish removal: skip bins	$1,040.00	Rubbish removal: skip bins
Carpet Cleaning	$207.00	Carpet Cleaning
Replace furnishings: clothesline	$330.00	Replace furnishings: clothesline
Repairs: holes in walls	$141.00	Repairs: holes in walls
Rubbish removal: dumping fees	$315.00	Rubbish removal: dumping fees
Lock/key replacement: no keys returned and broken lock	$610.79	Lock/key replacement: no keys returned and broken lock
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Cleaning	$345.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal: owners time	$240.00	Rubbish removal: owners time
Net award	$4,230.08
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,230.08

Nathan David Colville must pay Morris And Co Property Management Limited As Agents For Katrina Green & Michael Scofield $4,230.08 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 29 April 2025.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,560.00 (3314158-013) to Morris And Co Property Management Limited As Agents For Katrina Green & Michael Scofield immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing represented by Mr Davies.

The tenant did not attend and did not answer the calls made to his phone during the hearing. He had been notified of the hearing by email and text, accordingly pursuant to section 92 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) the hearing continued in his absence.

The previous Tribunal order for rent arrears is incorporated into this order for debt recovery purposes.

The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

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) RTA.

The landlord has established in evidence that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The property was dirty with a number of belongings left, particularly in the garden.

The owner has done much of this work themselves therefore they are awarded a nominal amount for their time. Their travel time and fuel are not awarded as sought as this is not a reasonable cost for a tenant to absorb given they have no input into the location of a landlord proximate to the tenancy. It is a business cost the Tribunal expects a landlord to absorb.

The tenant did not return the keys and left a broken back doorlock. The claim for lock replacement is established in evidence.

The clothesline had also been removed during the tenancy, accordingly the cost for replacing is as ordered as sought.

The amounts ordered are proven in evidence and considered reasonable in the circumstances.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The landlord claims compensation for having to replace the oven that was so dirty it could not be used. Also to replace curtains in the lounge and bedroom that were ripped and repair holes in walls.

To be successful in such a claim, 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.

Having assessed the evidence I am satisfied that the damage is more than fair wear and tear and occurred during the tenancy. The tenants had a dog in the property without consent that appears to have ripped the curtains.

In making awards I must take into account 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.

I have reduced the amount claimed for the oven significantly on the basis it was older and likely had reached the end of its expected life span in a residential tenancy which is 8 years. I accept it was replaced with a second-hand model and had to be replaced because the tenant misused it.

I have also reduced the amount claimed for curtain replacement for similar reasons. They were older curtains, but they had been ripped by an unconsented dog.

Because Morris And Co Property Management Limited As Agents For Katrina Green & Michael Scofield has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5177392 — net $4,230.08 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Previous order application 5177392 dated 29/04/2025	$1,884.29	Previous order application 5177392 dated 29/04/2025
Replace furnishings: curtains lounge & bedroom	$550.00	Replace furnishings: curtains lounge & bedroom
Replace furnishings: oven	$100.00	Replace furnishings: oven
Rubbish removal: skip bins	$1,040.00	Rubbish removal: skip bins
Carpet Cleaning	$207.00	Carpet Cleaning
Replace furnishings: clothesline	$330.00	Replace furnishings: clothesline
Repairs: holes in walls	$141.00	Repairs: holes in walls
Rubbish removal: dumping fees	$315.00	Rubbish removal: dumping fees
Lock/key replacement: no keys returned and broken lock	$610.79	Lock/key replacement: no keys returned and broken lock
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Cleaning	$345.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal: owners time	$240.00	Rubbish removal: owners time
Net award	$4,230.08
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,230.08

Order

Nathan David Colville must pay Morris And Co Property Management Limited As Agents For Katrina Green & Michael Scofield $4,230.08 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 29 April 2025.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,560.00 (3314158-013) to Morris And Co Property Management Limited As Agents For Katrina Green & Michael Scofield immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing represented by Mr Davies.
The tenant did not attend and did not answer the calls made to his phone during the hearing. He had been notified of the hearing by email and text, accordingly pursuant to section 92 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) the hearing continued in his absence.
The previous Tribunal order for rent arrears is incorporated into this order for debt recovery purposes.
The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

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) RTA.
The landlord has established in evidence that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The property was dirty with a number of belongings left, particularly in the garden.
The owner has done much of this work themselves therefore they are awarded a nominal amount for their time. Their travel time and fuel are not awarded as sought as this is not a reasonable cost for a tenant to absorb given they have no input into the location of a landlord proximate to the tenancy. It is a business cost the Tribunal expects a landlord to absorb.
The tenant did not return the keys and left a broken back doorlock. The claim for lock replacement is established in evidence.
The clothesline had also been removed during the tenancy, accordingly the cost for replacing is as ordered as sought.
The amounts ordered are proven in evidence and considered reasonable in the circumstances.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The landlord claims compensation for having to replace the oven that was so dirty it could not be used. Also to replace curtains in the lounge and bedroom that were ripped and repair holes in walls.
To be successful in such a claim, 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.
Having assessed the evidence I am satisfied that the damage is more than fair wear and tear and occurred during the tenancy. The tenants had a dog in the property without consent that appears to have ripped the curtains.
In making awards I must take into account 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.
I have reduced the amount claimed for the oven significantly on the basis it was older and likely had reached the end of its expected life span in a residential tenancy which is 8 years. I accept it was replaced with a second-hand model and had to be replaced because the tenant misused it.
I have also reduced the amount claimed for curtain replacement for similar reasons. They were older curtains, but they had been ripped by an unconsented dog.
Because Morris And Co Property Management Limited As Agents For Katrina Green & Michael Scofield has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5177392 — Property damage at 5 Kowai Street, Leithfield, Leithfield 7481

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5177392 — Property damage at 5 Kowai Street, Leithfield, Leithfield 7481

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions