What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5204274 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 5204274?

Cleaning: $600.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $345.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $6,705.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $470.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $519.52 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5204274?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness, Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5204274?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12563640-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5204274 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 5204274?

Cleaning: $600.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $345.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $6,705.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $470.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $519.52 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5204274?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness, Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5204274?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12563640-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

45 McDivitt Street, Manurewa, Auckland 2102 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5204274 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5204274 — net $6,666.52 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 22/10/24	$6,705.00	Rent arrears to 22/10/24
Water rates to 16/10/24	$519.52	Water rates to 16/10/24
Cleaning	$600.00	Cleaning
Lock/key replacement	$345.00	Lock/key replacement
Rubbish removal	$470.00	Rubbish removal
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$6,666.52
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$6,666.52

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,000.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.
Atalili Atalili and Sefulu Atalili must pay [The landlord/s] $6,666.52 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:

Reasons

Introduction

Atalili Atalili and Sefulu Atalili (the Tenant) lived at 45 McDivitt Street, Manurewa, Auckland (the Premises) currently managed by [The landlord/s] (the Landlord) for 7.5 years.
The Landlord says that, after the tenancy ended in October 2024, the Tenant owed rent arrears and water rates, and failed to leave the Premises clean and tidy and remove all rubbish. The Landlord also seeks compensation for damage to a shower head and the oven.
The issues I have to determine are: a. Does the Tenant owe rent arrears? b. Does the Tenant owe payment for water consumed during the tenancy? c. Did the Tenant fail to leave the Premises reasonably clean at the end of tenancy? d. Did the Tenant fail to return all keys at the end of tenancy? e. Did the Tenant fail to remove all rubbish at the end of tenancy? f. Are the Tenants liable for the cost of repairing damage to fixtures in the

Premises?

g. Should the Landlord be reimbursed the filing fee? h. Should the Landlord’s name be suppressed?

On 15 October 2025, the Landlord attended the phone hearing. Calls to the Tenant on each of their mobile numbers, as recorded in the tenancy agreement, went unanswered. I am satisfied the Tenant was served with notice of the hearing and proceeded in their absence. The Tribunal’s approach to the issues
The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act).
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards. That includes a requirement that the party bringing the claim establish their claim “on the balance of probabilities”. The balance of probabilities means more likely than unlikely, or in mathematical terms, has a fraction more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely.
This obligation carried by the applicant is referred to as the “burden of proof”. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
As noted by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: [L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.

Does the Tenant owe rent arrears?

The tenancy ended on 22 October 2024. The Landlord provided rent records which prove as at that date, the Tenant owed $6,825 in rent. Three payments of $60 each were received in November and December 2024. The Landlord confirmed no further payments had been received from the Tenant since 3 December 2024.
The current rent arrears are $6,705. I am satisfied the Landlord has proved the amount is owing and make the order accordingly.

Does the Tenant owe payment for water consumed during the tenancy?

The tenancy ended on 22 October 2024. The Landlord seeks payment of $1,261.28 in unpaid water rates.
The Landlord provided water rates records which prove that for the period 14 November 2023 to 16 October 2024, the Tenant accrued unpaid water charges of $519.52.
The Landlord submitted there was an additional unpaid water charge of $42.52 for the month ending 14 November 2023 however the Landlord did not provide a Watercare invoice as proof of the amount consumed and charged. Therefore, while the Landlord’s Tenancy Invoices summary records that $562.04 was owing as at 24 October 2024, the Landlord has only proved $519.52 was owing.
The Landlord also submitted the Tenant had accrued a further $699.24 in charges for water usage up to the end of the tenancy. In support, the Landlord provided a Watercare invoice dated 16 December 2024 charging $699.24 for water consumed between 16 October 2024 and 20 November 2024. The Landlord stated the premises was empty for a period of two weeks after the Tenant moved out on 22 October 2024. New tenants moved into the Premises on 5 November 2024.
The Landlord did not take a final meter reading after the Tenant moved out and before the new tenants moved in.
I am not satisfied the Landlord has proved the further charges of $699.24 were for water consumed exclusively by the Tenant during the tenancy. The Landlord says most of those charges would have been from the Tenant’s use as prior bills had been estimates rather than actual readings, however, as the Landlord did not take a final reading at the end of the tenancy, that is purely speculation.
Accordingly, an order is made for unpaid water charges in the amount of $519.52 for the period 14 November 2023 to 16 October 2024.

Did the Tenant fail to leave the Premises reasonably clean at the end of tenancy?

At the end of the tenancy the tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy. 1 A tenant is not required to leave a property in an immaculate standard of cleanliness. The standard is what an average, reasonable bystander would consider “reasonably clean” and “reasonably tidy”.
The Landlord says the Tenants did not leave the interior of the Premises reasonably clean and tidy. The Landlord produced photos taken during the final inspection on 22 October 2024 which show surfaces were not cleaned, debris was left on the floors and floor coverings were not vacuumed or mopped. I am satisfied the Landlord has proved the Tenant did not leave the Premises reasonably clean.
The Landlord produced an invoice for cleaning the premises, totalling $862.50.
While I am satisfied the Landlord has proved the Tenant did not leave the Premises reasonably clean, I note that a professional cleaner is likely to bring a property to a standard that is higher than “reasonably clean” and “reasonably tidy.” Given this, I do not accept the Tenant is liable for the full cost of a professional clean.
I consider an appropriate contribution towards the cost of bringing the Premises to the requisite standard is $600, and make an order accordingly.

Did the Tenant fail to return all keys at the end of tenancy?

At the end of the tenancy a tenant must return to the landlord all keys provided. 2
The Landlord says the Tenant did not return the keys and a locksmith had to be called to gain entry to the Premises and replace three locks. In support of the claim, the Landlord produced an invoice from the locksmith in the amount of $345.
The Tenant was not present to dispute the Landlord’s claim that the Tenant did not return the keys. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, I am satisfied it is more likely than not that the Tenant did not return the keys. 1 See section 40(1)(e)(iii) of the Act. 2 See section 40(1)(e)(iv) of the Act.
I make the order accordingly.

Did the Tenant fail to remove all rubbish at the end of tenancy?

At the end of the tenancy a tenant must remove or arrange for the removal from the premises of all rubbish. 3
The Landlord says the Tenant did not remove all rubbish, leaving several items such as chairs, wood and tyres around the exterior of the Premises.
The Landlord relied on the photos taken during the final inspection on 22 October 2024 which show an oil drum on the grass, several chairs in the garage and around the exterior, a stack of tyres and a large orange flexible skip left outside. The Landlord also produced an invoice in the amount of $470 from a tradesperson who removed and disposed of the rubbish.
I am satisfied the Landlord has proved the Tenant did not remove all rubbish from the Premises and that the cost as claimed to have the rubbish removed was actually incurred by the Landlord.
I make an order accordingly.

Are the Tenants liable for the cost of repairing damage to fixtures in 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. 4
The Landlord seeks reimbursement of the cost of replacing a shower head and hose and purchasing and installing a new oven. The Landlord says during the final inspection they discovered the shower head was leaking and the oven was not working. The Landlord says the Tenant did not bring these matters to the Landlord’s attention and, given they were working at the start of the tenancy, the Tenant should reimburse the Landlord for the cost of replacing both fixtures.
The Landlord was unsure how old either the shower hose or oven were.
The Landlord confirmed the photos taken during the final inspection on 22 October 2024 do not show any broken parts or obvious damage on either the shower head/hose or the oven. The Landlord confirmed there was no evidence to indicate the Tenant did anything to the shower head/hose or oven to cause either to stop working. 3 See section 40(1)(e)(iii) of the Act. 4 See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B of the Act.0
In the absence of any evidence to show the Tenant caused damage, I am not satisfied the Landlord has proved any damage to the shower head/hose and/or oven was more than fair wear and tear. Given the Tenant lived in the Premises for 7.5 years, and the Landlord was unsure of the age of either fixture, it is more likely these items had simply reached the end of their life (or parts of them had).
The Landlord’s claim for compensation for damage to the shower head/hose and oven are dismissed.

Should the Landlord be reimbursed the filing fee?

As the Landlord has been partly (and substantially) successful in their claim the Tenant must reimburse the filing fee.
I make an order accordingly. Should the Landlord’s name be suppressed?
The Landlord applied for suppression of their name. As their application was substantially successful, the Landlord is entitled to name suppression and I make the order accordingly. 5

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5204274 — net $6,666.52 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 22/10/24	$6,705.00	Rent arrears to 22/10/24
Water rates to 16/10/24	$519.52	Water rates to 16/10/24
Cleaning	$600.00	Cleaning
Lock/key replacement	$345.00	Lock/key replacement
Rubbish removal	$470.00	Rubbish removal
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$6,666.52
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$6,666.52

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,000.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.
Atalili Atalili and Sefulu Atalili must pay [The landlord/s] $6,666.52 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:

Reasons

Introduction

Atalili Atalili and Sefulu Atalili (the Tenant) lived at 45 McDivitt Street, Manurewa, Auckland (the Premises) currently managed by [The landlord/s] (the Landlord) for 7.5 years.
The Landlord says that, after the tenancy ended in October 2024, the Tenant owed rent arrears and water rates, and failed to leave the Premises clean and tidy and remove all rubbish. The Landlord also seeks compensation for damage to a shower head and the oven.
The issues I have to determine are: a. Does the Tenant owe rent arrears? b. Does the Tenant owe payment for water consumed during the tenancy? c. Did the Tenant fail to leave the Premises reasonably clean at the end of tenancy? d. Did the Tenant fail to return all keys at the end of tenancy? e. Did the Tenant fail to remove all rubbish at the end of tenancy? f. Are the Tenants liable for the cost of repairing damage to fixtures in the

Premises?

g. Should the Landlord be reimbursed the filing fee? h. Should the Landlord’s name be suppressed?

On 15 October 2025, the Landlord attended the phone hearing. Calls to the Tenant on each of their mobile numbers, as recorded in the tenancy agreement, went unanswered. I am satisfied the Tenant was served with notice of the hearing and proceeded in their absence. The Tribunal’s approach to the issues
The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act).
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards. That includes a requirement that the party bringing the claim establish their claim “on the balance of probabilities”. The balance of probabilities means more likely than unlikely, or in mathematical terms, has a fraction more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely.
This obligation carried by the applicant is referred to as the “burden of proof”. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
As noted by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: [L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.

Does the Tenant owe rent arrears?

The tenancy ended on 22 October 2024. The Landlord provided rent records which prove as at that date, the Tenant owed $6,825 in rent. Three payments of $60 each were received in November and December 2024. The Landlord confirmed no further payments had been received from the Tenant since 3 December 2024.
The current rent arrears are $6,705. I am satisfied the Landlord has proved the amount is owing and make the order accordingly.

Does the Tenant owe payment for water consumed during the tenancy?

The tenancy ended on 22 October 2024. The Landlord seeks payment of $1,261.28 in unpaid water rates.
The Landlord provided water rates records which prove that for the period 14 November 2023 to 16 October 2024, the Tenant accrued unpaid water charges of $519.52.
The Landlord submitted there was an additional unpaid water charge of $42.52 for the month ending 14 November 2023 however the Landlord did not provide a Watercare invoice as proof of the amount consumed and charged. Therefore, while the Landlord’s Tenancy Invoices summary records that $562.04 was owing as at 24 October 2024, the Landlord has only proved $519.52 was owing.
The Landlord also submitted the Tenant had accrued a further $699.24 in charges for water usage up to the end of the tenancy. In support, the Landlord provided a Watercare invoice dated 16 December 2024 charging $699.24 for water consumed between 16 October 2024 and 20 November 2024. The Landlord stated the premises was empty for a period of two weeks after the Tenant moved out on 22 October 2024. New tenants moved into the Premises on 5 November 2024.
The Landlord did not take a final meter reading after the Tenant moved out and before the new tenants moved in.
I am not satisfied the Landlord has proved the further charges of $699.24 were for water consumed exclusively by the Tenant during the tenancy. The Landlord says most of those charges would have been from the Tenant’s use as prior bills had been estimates rather than actual readings, however, as the Landlord did not take a final reading at the end of the tenancy, that is purely speculation.
Accordingly, an order is made for unpaid water charges in the amount of $519.52 for the period 14 November 2023 to 16 October 2024.

Did the Tenant fail to leave the Premises reasonably clean at the end of tenancy?

At the end of the tenancy the tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy. 1 A tenant is not required to leave a property in an immaculate standard of cleanliness. The standard is what an average, reasonable bystander would consider “reasonably clean” and “reasonably tidy”.
The Landlord says the Tenants did not leave the interior of the Premises reasonably clean and tidy. The Landlord produced photos taken during the final inspection on 22 October 2024 which show surfaces were not cleaned, debris was left on the floors and floor coverings were not vacuumed or mopped. I am satisfied the Landlord has proved the Tenant did not leave the Premises reasonably clean.
The Landlord produced an invoice for cleaning the premises, totalling $862.50.
While I am satisfied the Landlord has proved the Tenant did not leave the Premises reasonably clean, I note that a professional cleaner is likely to bring a property to a standard that is higher than “reasonably clean” and “reasonably tidy.” Given this, I do not accept the Tenant is liable for the full cost of a professional clean.
I consider an appropriate contribution towards the cost of bringing the Premises to the requisite standard is $600, and make an order accordingly.

Did the Tenant fail to return all keys at the end of tenancy?

At the end of the tenancy a tenant must return to the landlord all keys provided. 2
The Landlord says the Tenant did not return the keys and a locksmith had to be called to gain entry to the Premises and replace three locks. In support of the claim, the Landlord produced an invoice from the locksmith in the amount of $345.
The Tenant was not present to dispute the Landlord’s claim that the Tenant did not return the keys. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, I am satisfied it is more likely than not that the Tenant did not return the keys. 1 See section 40(1)(e)(iii) of the Act. 2 See section 40(1)(e)(iv) of the Act.
I make the order accordingly.

Did the Tenant fail to remove all rubbish at the end of tenancy?

At the end of the tenancy a tenant must remove or arrange for the removal from the premises of all rubbish. 3
The Landlord says the Tenant did not remove all rubbish, leaving several items such as chairs, wood and tyres around the exterior of the Premises.
The Landlord relied on the photos taken during the final inspection on 22 October 2024 which show an oil drum on the grass, several chairs in the garage and around the exterior, a stack of tyres and a large orange flexible skip left outside. The Landlord also produced an invoice in the amount of $470 from a tradesperson who removed and disposed of the rubbish.
I am satisfied the Landlord has proved the Tenant did not remove all rubbish from the Premises and that the cost as claimed to have the rubbish removed was actually incurred by the Landlord.
I make an order accordingly.

Are the Tenants liable for the cost of repairing damage to fixtures in 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. 4
The Landlord seeks reimbursement of the cost of replacing a shower head and hose and purchasing and installing a new oven. The Landlord says during the final inspection they discovered the shower head was leaking and the oven was not working. The Landlord says the Tenant did not bring these matters to the Landlord’s attention and, given they were working at the start of the tenancy, the Tenant should reimburse the Landlord for the cost of replacing both fixtures.
The Landlord was unsure how old either the shower hose or oven were.
The Landlord confirmed the photos taken during the final inspection on 22 October 2024 do not show any broken parts or obvious damage on either the shower head/hose or the oven. The Landlord confirmed there was no evidence to indicate the Tenant did anything to the shower head/hose or oven to cause either to stop working. 3 See section 40(1)(e)(iii) of the Act. 4 See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B of the Act.0
In the absence of any evidence to show the Tenant caused damage, I am not satisfied the Landlord has proved any damage to the shower head/hose and/or oven was more than fair wear and tear. Given the Tenant lived in the Premises for 7.5 years, and the Landlord was unsure of the age of either fixture, it is more likely these items had simply reached the end of their life (or parts of them had).
The Landlord’s claim for compensation for damage to the shower head/hose and oven are dismissed.

Should the Landlord be reimbursed the filing fee?

As the Landlord has been partly (and substantially) successful in their claim the Tenant must reimburse the filing fee.
I make an order accordingly. Should the Landlord’s name be suppressed?
The Landlord applied for suppression of their name. As their application was substantially successful, the Landlord is entitled to name suppression and I make the order accordingly. 5

Tenancy Tribunal case 5204274 — Rent arrears at 45 McDivitt Street, Manurewa, Auckland 2102

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5204274 — Rent arrears at 45 McDivitt Street, Manurewa, Auckland 2102

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Premises?

Does the Tenant owe rent arrears?

Does the Tenant owe payment for water consumed during the tenancy?

Did the Tenant fail to leave the Premises reasonably clean at the end of tenancy?

Did the Tenant fail to return all keys at the end of tenancy?

Did the Tenant fail to remove all rubbish at the end of tenancy?

Are the Tenants liable for the cost of repairing damage to fixtures in the Premises?

Should the Landlord be reimbursed the filing fee?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Premises?

Does the Tenant owe rent arrears?

Does the Tenant owe payment for water consumed during the tenancy?

Did the Tenant fail to leave the Premises reasonably clean at the end of tenancy?

Did the Tenant fail to return all keys at the end of tenancy?

Did the Tenant fail to remove all rubbish at the end of tenancy?

Are the Tenants liable for the cost of repairing damage to fixtures in the Premises?

Should the Landlord be reimbursed the filing fee?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions