What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5186951 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 5186951?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5186951?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5186951?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12425774-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5186951 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 5186951?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5186951?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5186951?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12425774-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5186951 — Tenancy dispute

Order

The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.
The landlord’s application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended remote hearings on 17 September 2025 and 10 June 2025.
The landlord claims compensation for damage to chattels during the tenancy.
He says the items damaged are:- a. A microwave; b. Sliding door lock; c. Sliding door alarm; d. A light switch cover.
He also says the tenant did not return all keys. Making a legal claim about damage
The person who makes a claim in a court or tribunal must supply enough evidence to prove their claims.
I do not have to be certain, but I must be satisfied that what the landlord claims is “more probable than not”.
A landlord must prove that the chattel or house was not damaged at the start of the tenancy and was damaged during the tenancy. The landlord must also prove any damage is more than from “fair wear and tear”.
If the landlord proves this, then the tenant must prove they did not carelessly or intentionally damage something.
I allowed the landlord extra time after the first hearing to provide more evidence because he said that he had this.
Both the landlord and tenant have sent more evidence.
My decisions are below. Decisions
Microwave: The landlord says the door of the microwave was damaged during the tenancy. The tenant says the door was damaged from the start of the tenancy, so he did not use it. The landlord sent a photograph, but the photo is blurry. I cannot see any damage. This means the claim is not proven.
Sliding door lock: the landlord says part of the locking mechanism for the sliding door upstairs went missing during the tenancy. The tenant says the door was always like this and he locked the door by using the slide bolt at the top of the door. The landlord has not proven the sliding door was working at the start of the tenancy. This claim is not proven.
Sliding door alarm: the landlord says that a door alarm was installed on the sliding door upstairs during the tenancy, that the council inspected this and confirmed it was working, and that the alarm was not working at the end of the tenancy. He says the tenant agreed to him buying a new alarm from Temu which cost $40.00. The tenant says the landlord’s alarm was working at the end of the tenancy and he did not agree to pay for a new alarm. There is not enough evidence to satisfy me that the door alarm installed by the landlord during the tenancy was not working at the end of the tenancy. This claim is not proven.
Switch cover: The landlord supplied a photo showing a small crack in an electrical switch cover. He withdrew this claim at the hearing. He also said he has not replaced the cover.
I have looked at all evidence and decided that the landlord has not supplied enough evidence to prove that the four items were working and undamaged at the start of the tenancy and were damaged from more than wear and tear at the end of the tenancy.
Keys: The tenant said he gave the keys back to the landlord’s wife. The landlord says he thinks there are keys missing and worries the tenant or other occupant may still have a key. It is not clear if keys are missing, and the tenancy ended nine months ago and there have been no security problems. Also, the landlord has not changed the locks so has not incurred a cost. I dismiss this claim.
The landlord’s claims are dismissed.
The bond has already been refunded to the tenant.
I suppress the tenant’s name as none of the claims are proven.

Reasons

Both parties attended remote hearings on 17 September 2025 and 10 June 2025.

The landlord claims compensation for damage to chattels during the tenancy.

He says the items damaged are:- a. A microwave; b. Sliding door lock; c. Sliding door alarm; d. A light switch cover.

He also says the tenant did not return all keys. Making a legal claim about damage

The person who makes a claim in a court or tribunal must supply enough evidence to prove their claims.

I do not have to be certain, but I must be satisfied that what the landlord claims is “more probable than not”.

A landlord must prove that the chattel or house was not damaged at the start of the tenancy and was damaged during the tenancy. The landlord must also prove any damage is more than from “fair wear and tear”.

If the landlord proves this, then the tenant must prove they did not carelessly or intentionally damage something.

I allowed the landlord extra time after the first hearing to provide more evidence because he said that he had this.

Both the landlord and tenant have sent more evidence.

My decisions are below. Decisions

Microwave: The landlord says the door of the microwave was damaged during the tenancy. The tenant says the door was damaged from the start of the tenancy, so he did not use it. The landlord sent a photograph, but the photo is blurry. I cannot see any damage. This means the claim is not proven.

Sliding door lock: the landlord says part of the locking mechanism for the sliding door upstairs went missing during the tenancy. The tenant says the door was always like this and he locked the door by using the slide bolt at the top of the door. The landlord has not proven the sliding door was working at the start of the tenancy. This claim is not proven.

Sliding door alarm: the landlord says that a door alarm was installed on the sliding door upstairs during the tenancy, that the council inspected this and confirmed it was working, and that the alarm was not working at the end of the tenancy. He says the tenant agreed to him buying a new alarm from Temu which cost $40.00. The tenant says the landlord’s alarm was working at the end of the tenancy and he did not agree to pay for a new alarm. There is not enough evidence to satisfy me that the door alarm installed by the landlord during the tenancy was not working at the end of the tenancy. This claim is not proven.

Switch cover: The landlord supplied a photo showing a small crack in an electrical switch cover. He withdrew this claim at the hearing. He also said he has not replaced the cover.

I have looked at all evidence and decided that the landlord has not supplied enough evidence to prove that the four items were working and undamaged at the start of the tenancy and were damaged from more than wear and tear at the end of the tenancy.

Keys: The tenant said he gave the keys back to the landlord’s wife. The landlord says he thinks there are keys missing and worries the tenant or other occupant may still have a key. It is not clear if keys are missing, and the tenancy ended nine months ago and there have been no security problems. Also, the landlord has not changed the locks so has not incurred a cost. I dismiss this claim.

The landlord’s claims are dismissed.

The bond has already been refunded to the tenant.

I suppress the tenant’s name as none of the claims are proven.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5186951 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5186951 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions