What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5193671?

The tribunal order states: Josh Moeaitino and Fono Misi must pay Barfoot & Thompson Limited As Agent

How much money was awarded in case 5193671?

Cleaning: $1,080.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $373.37 awarded to landlord; Pest Control: $460.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $2,658.59 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5193671?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5193671?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12091869-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5193671?

The tribunal order states: Josh Moeaitino and Fono Misi must pay Barfoot & Thompson Limited As Agent

How much money was awarded in case 5193671?

Cleaning: $1,080.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $373.37 awarded to landlord; Pest Control: $460.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $2,658.59 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5193671?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5193671?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12091869-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

100 Marne Road, Papakura, Papakura 2110 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5193671 — Cleanliness

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5193671 — net $4,598.96 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Lawns and Garden work	$373.37	Lawns and Garden work
Cleaning	$1,080.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$2,658.59	claim for rubbish removal is proven. Cleaning
Pest control: Cockroaches	$460.00	Pest control: Cockroaches
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$4,598.96
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,598.96

Ms Marshall for the landlord attended today’s telephone hearing. The tenants were contacted twice on the phone number provided in the application. On each occasion the calls rang through to answerphone. I have proceeded in the tenants’ absence.

The tenancy ended on the 14 April 2025 after the tenants gave notice to the landlord.

On the 15 April the tenancy manager went to property to conduct the final inspection. As the tenants had left a lot of their belongings behind and the place had not been cleaned, the tenancy manager emailed the tenants to see what was going on and to give them an opportunity to come back and clean and retrieve their belongings. The landlord says that they did not receive any reply to that correspondence or to the correspondence on the 23 April, and therefore on the 23 April then landlord organised removal and disposal of the tenant’s belonging and cleaning of the property.

The landlord also changed the locks on the 15 April, and applied for the bond which was not opposed by the tenant. The landlord tells me that they have applied the bond towards rent arrears, water rates, lock changes and $29.13 towards the lawn invoice.

The landlord’s outstanding claims are for: a. Cleaning- $1080.00 b. Rubbish removal – 2 invoices $899 and $1759.59. c. Balance of the lawns and gardens- $373.37 d. Pest control - $620.00 e. Filing fee -$27.00

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) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

The landlord provided the tribunal with photographs of the property at the beginning of the tenancy, and photographs taken by the property manager on the 15 April after the tenancy ended. The photographs at the end of the tenancy speak for themselves, they show that no cleaning appears to have been done, the tenants have left most of their belongings behind. Rubbish.

I accept that the landlord gave the tenants ample opportunity to retrieve their belongings and to come and clean the property. The tenants did not take up this offer.

The landlord had to dispose of the tenants’ belongings and rubbish. The landlord told me that they asked Junk2go to do the first lot of rubbish removal, but this was expensive, so they got their handyman services to organise skip bins and do the removal themselves which was about half of the cost. I am satisfied that the landlord incurred the costs of rubbish removal and the costs incurred were reasonable for the volume and nature of rubbish and belongings that had to be removed.

I am satisfied that none of the tenants’ items had a value that would have been more than the cost of trying to store and sell that item and therefore everything left at the property had to be disposed of.

The landlord’s claim for rubbish removal is proven. Cleaning

The landlord’s photographs of the property show a property that is not reasonably clean and tidy, food has been left out on the counter and in the fridge and can be seen to be spoiled and old.

The landlord had conducted an inspection on the 18 March and as a result of the inspection had issued a 14-day notice for cleaning and pest control.

The landlord had the property cleaned on the 7 May 2025 after the rubbish was removed. I accept that the landlord attempted to have the tenants come and clean the property, and then had to have the rubbish removed and that lead to a delay in having the property cleaned.

The invoice for cleaning is high for a 3-bedroom one bathroom home, however given the condition of the property in the photographs, it is justified. I am satisfied that the invoice is for cleaning only to bring the property back to a reasonably clean and tidy condition. Pest Control

I am also satisfied that due to the way the tenant’s were living in the property, and the way they left the property that there was a significant cockroach infestation. The landlord had to use two lots of pest control and I award the landlord that amount.

The landlord also asked for rodent control included in the pest control invoice of the 29 May 2025, but there was no evidence to show that there was a rodent problem at the property. It appears that the rodent bait, may have been for outside the property and if so, that is a landlord maintenance item. I have not awarded the landlord the costs of rodent control. Lawns and Gardens

The landlord produced photographs of the lawns at the property. After the inspection on the 18 March the tenants were given a 14 day notice in respect of the overgrown lawns. It appears that they did not mow the lawns between 18 March and the end of the tenancy.

The lawns were overgrown and needed to be mowed, whilst the invoice is high I am satisfied that it reasonable for the work that was required, the property is large and the lawns were very overgrown.

The amounts ordered are proved. Filing fee

Because Barfoot & Thompson Limited As Agent For Kamal Sivia has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5193671 — net $4,598.96 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Lawns and Garden work	$373.37	Lawns and Garden work
Cleaning	$1,080.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$2,658.59	claim for rubbish removal is proven. Cleaning
Pest control: Cockroaches	$460.00	Pest control: Cockroaches
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$4,598.96
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,598.96

Order

Josh Moeaitino and Fono Misi must pay Barfoot & Thompson Limited As Agent For Kamal Sivia $4,598.96 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

Ms Marshall for the landlord attended today’s telephone hearing. The tenants were contacted twice on the phone number provided in the application. On each occasion the calls rang through to answerphone. I have proceeded in the tenants’ absence.
The tenancy ended on the 14 April 2025 after the tenants gave notice to the landlord.
On the 15 April the tenancy manager went to property to conduct the final inspection. As the tenants had left a lot of their belongings behind and the place had not been cleaned, the tenancy manager emailed the tenants to see what was going on and to give them an opportunity to come back and clean and retrieve their belongings. The landlord says that they did not receive any reply to that correspondence or to the correspondence on the 23 April, and therefore on the 23 April then landlord organised removal and disposal of the tenant’s belonging and cleaning of the property.
The landlord also changed the locks on the 15 April, and applied for the bond which was not opposed by the tenant. The landlord tells me that they have applied the bond towards rent arrears, water rates, lock changes and $29.13 towards the lawn invoice.
The landlord’s outstanding claims are for: a. Cleaning- $1080.00 b. Rubbish removal – 2 invoices $899 and $1759.59. c. Balance of the lawns and gardens- $373.37 d. Pest control - $620.00 e. Filing fee -$27.00

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) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord provided the tribunal with photographs of the property at the beginning of the tenancy, and photographs taken by the property manager on the 15 April after the tenancy ended. The photographs at the end of the tenancy speak for themselves, they show that no cleaning appears to have been done, the tenants have left most of their belongings behind. Rubbish.
I accept that the landlord gave the tenants ample opportunity to retrieve their belongings and to come and clean the property. The tenants did not take up this offer.
The landlord had to dispose of the tenants’ belongings and rubbish. The landlord told me that they asked Junk2go to do the first lot of rubbish removal, but this was expensive, so they got their handyman services to organise skip bins and do the removal themselves which was about half of the cost. I am satisfied that the landlord incurred the costs of rubbish removal and the costs incurred were reasonable for the volume and nature of rubbish and belongings that had to be removed.
I am satisfied that none of the tenants’ items had a value that would have been more than the cost of trying to store and sell that item and therefore everything left at the property had to be disposed of.
The landlord’s claim for rubbish removal is proven. Cleaning
The landlord’s photographs of the property show a property that is not reasonably clean and tidy, food has been left out on the counter and in the fridge and can be seen to be spoiled and old.
The landlord had conducted an inspection on the 18 March and as a result of the inspection had issued a 14-day notice for cleaning and pest control.
The landlord had the property cleaned on the 7 May 2025 after the rubbish was removed. I accept that the landlord attempted to have the tenants come and clean the property, and then had to have the rubbish removed and that lead to a delay in having the property cleaned.
The invoice for cleaning is high for a 3-bedroom one bathroom home, however given the condition of the property in the photographs, it is justified. I am satisfied that the invoice is for cleaning only to bring the property back to a reasonably clean and tidy condition. Pest Control
I am also satisfied that due to the way the tenant’s were living in the property, and the way they left the property that there was a significant cockroach infestation. The landlord had to use two lots of pest control and I award the landlord that amount.
The landlord also asked for rodent control included in the pest control invoice of the 29 May 2025, but there was no evidence to show that there was a rodent problem at the property. It appears that the rodent bait, may have been for outside the property and if so, that is a landlord maintenance item. I have not awarded the landlord the costs of rodent control. Lawns and Gardens
The landlord produced photographs of the lawns at the property. After the inspection on the 18 March the tenants were given a 14 day notice in respect of the overgrown lawns. It appears that they did not mow the lawns between 18 March and the end of the tenancy.
The lawns were overgrown and needed to be mowed, whilst the invoice is high I am satisfied that it reasonable for the work that was required, the property is large and the lawns were very overgrown.
The amounts ordered are proved. Filing fee
Because Barfoot & Thompson Limited As Agent For Kamal Sivia has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5193671 — Cleanliness at 100 Marne Road, Papakura, Papakura 2110

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5193671 — Cleanliness at 100 Marne Road, Papakura, Papakura 2110

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

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?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions