What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5223771 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 5223771?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $280.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $5,717.14 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $807.30 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5223771?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5223771?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12258080-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5223771 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 5223771?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $280.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $5,717.14 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $807.30 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5223771?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5223771?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12258080-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5223771 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5223771 — Rent arrears | TenantCheck

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5223771 — net $6,831.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$5,717.14	Rent arrears
Repairs: Bathroom floor replacement	$807.30	Repairs: Bathroom floor replacement
Lock/key replacement	$280.00	Lock/key replacement
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$6,831.44
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$6,831.44

Claims and awards for application 5223771 — net $6,831.44 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears

Amount: $5,717.14
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears

Repairs: Bathroom floor replacement

Amount: $807.30
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Bathroom floor replacement

Lock/key replacement

Amount: $280.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lock/key replacement

Filing fee reimbursement

Amount: $27.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Filing fee reimbursement

Net award

Landlord $6,831.44

Total payable by Tenant to Landlord

Landlord $6,831.44

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Filing Fee Property damage Rent arrears

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
Mathew Sissons must pay [The landlord/s] $6,831.44 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:

Reasons

[Landlord] appeared for the landlords. Mr Sissons, the tenant, did not appear. The Tribunal was satisfied that the tenant was properly served with the notice of hearing and the case proceeded in their absence.
The parties were known to each other prior to the commencement of the tenancy with Mr Sissons having been [landlord’s] line manager at work.
The tenancy commenced on 28 July 2023 and was periodic.
On 15 May 2025, the Tribunal terminated the tenancy after finding it to have been abandoned on 21 April 2025. 1
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, and reimbursement of the filing fee. Burden of proof
The Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations.
One of the central expectations relates to onus of proof. With any claim before the Tribunal, it is the applicant who must establish the claim, or to put that another way, the applicant must prove the claim. If the applicant does not provide sufficient evidence and reasoning to establish the claim, then it must be dismissed.
The Tribunal requires the applicant to establish their claim to the balance of probabilities. That means that the applicant must show that what they are claiming is more likely than not. To put that into a mathematical context, the applicant must prove their claim to just over the 50% probability mark. Again, if the claim is not established to the balance of probability, it must be dismissed.

How much is owed for rent?

Section 61(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the “Act”) states that the Tribunal may terminate the tenancy where the premises have been abandoned and rent is in arrears.
Section 61(2) of the Act states that the Tribunal shall determine, as best it can on the evidence available before it, the date on which the landlord first became aware of, or ought to have been aware, that the tenant had abandoned the premises.
Section 61(3)(a) of the Act states that a tenant shall be liable to pay rent for a period of 21 days after the date determined by the Tribunal to have been the date the property was abandoned.
The Tribunal terminated the tenancy on 15 May 2025 after finding the property to have been abandoned on 21 April 2025.
The landlord provided up to date rent records that prove the amount owed. In accordance with section 61 of the Act the landlord is entitled to rent arrears to 12 May 2025 and the sum of $5,717.14 is ordered. 1 Melanie Lorraine Rowan, Jacob James Rowan v Mathew Sissons [2025] NZTT 5257133

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

With any claim from a landlord for compensation for damage to the premises, the landlord must prove that damage 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 49B, 66K(2)(a), and 66L of the Act.
Where the damage is caused carelessly, and is covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to the lesser of the insurance excess or four weeks' rent. See section 49B(3)(a) of the Act.
Where the damage is careless and is not covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to four weeks' rent (or market rent). See section 49B(3)(b) of the Act. Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. See section 49B(3A)(a) of the Act.
Tenants are liable for the cost of repairing damage that is intentional or which results from any activity at the premises that is an imprisonable offence. This applies to anything the tenant does and anything done by a person they are responsible for. See section 49B(1) of the Act.
Damage is intentional where a person intends to cause damage and takes the necessary steps to achieve that purpose. Damage is also intentional where a person does something, or allows a situation to continue, knowing that damage is a certainty. See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.

Is the tenant liable to pay compensation for a glazing repair in the front door?

The landlord seeks compensation to replace one of the glass panels in the front door they claim was broken by the tenant during the tenancy.
The landlord submitted an invoice for the cost of reglazing totalling $397.44.
The landlord provided the Tribunal with a text message from the tenant’s mother claiming the front door glazing was broken after the tenant moved out and was caused during a burglary.
There were no pre-tenancy photographs or inspection reports detailing the condition of the front door glazing at the commencement of the tenancy. Nor were any post tenancy photographs of the broken glazing provided.
Having considered all the evidence, I am not satisfied that the damage occurred during the tenancy and was the result of the tenant’s careless or intentional actions, or the actions of a person at the property with the tenant’s permission. The Tribunal can not discount that the glazing was broken during a burglary after the property was abandoned. The claim is dismissed.

Is the tenant liable to pay compensation for the rotten floor outside the bathroom?

The landlord claims the chipboard flooring immediately outside the bathroom was damaged during the tenancy. The landlord states they discovered the floor to be soft and rotten after visiting the property and finding it abandoned.
The landlord paid a contractor to undertake repairs to the floor. A one meter by one meter square of chipboard was removed and replaced and the existing underlay and carpet was re-laid. The landlord seeks $807.03 compensation.
During the hearing, the landlord provided the Tribunal with photographs taken at the commencement of the tenancy looking into the bathroom. These photographs show the condition of the flooring, bathroom, and shower to be clean and tidy with no obvious defects.
The landlord provided the Tribunal with photographs showing the condition of the flooring, from underneath the house, at the end of the tenancy. These photographs show an obvious wet patch in the chipboard. The landlord said her plumber inspected the water and wastewater pipes into the bathroom following the detection of the rotten flooring, but no leaks were detected.
Having considered all the evidence the Tribunal is satisfied that the damage occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. The Tribunal also considered that the damage to the flooring comprised of careless damage, meaning the tenant is liable for the remediation costs.
The end result is that the tenant must pay $807.30 for the floor remediation costs.

Is the tenant liable to pay compensation for the damaged garage door motor?

The landlord seeks compensation totalling $872.85 for damage to the garage door motor they say the tenant caused during the tenancy.
There are no pre-tenancy inspection photographs, reports or videos showing the condition of the garage door motor at the commencement of the tenancy.
There is one photograph of the garage door motor taken at the end of the tenancy.
Given the lack of evidence showing the condition of the garage door motor at the commencement of the tenancy the Tribunal cannot be satisfied damage occurred during the tenancy. The claim is dismissed.

Is the tenant liable for the cost of changing the locks?

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) the Act.
The landlord seeks $280.00 after instructing a lock smith to change the locks after the tenant failed to return the keys at the end of the tenancy.
The amount ordered is proved. Costs
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. Name Suppression.
Section 95A of the Act provides that on the application of a party that has been wholly or substantially successful in proceedings, the Tribunal must order that the name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that it is in the public interest to publish the names of the parties, or is justified because of the parties’ conduct, or any other circumstances of the case.
The landlord has been substantially successful and is granted name suppression.

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5223771 — net $6,831.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$5,717.14	Rent arrears
Repairs: Bathroom floor replacement	$807.30	Repairs: Bathroom floor replacement
Lock/key replacement	$280.00	Lock/key replacement
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$6,831.44
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$6,831.44

Claims and awards for application 5223771 — net $6,831.44 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears

Amount: $5,717.14
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears

Repairs: Bathroom floor replacement

Amount: $807.30
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Bathroom floor replacement

Lock/key replacement

Amount: $280.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lock/key replacement

Filing fee reimbursement

Amount: $27.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Filing fee reimbursement

Net award

Landlord $6,831.44

Total payable by Tenant to Landlord

Landlord $6,831.44

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Filing Fee Property damage Rent arrears

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
Mathew Sissons must pay [The landlord/s] $6,831.44 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:

Reasons

[Landlord] appeared for the landlords. Mr Sissons, the tenant, did not appear. The Tribunal was satisfied that the tenant was properly served with the notice of hearing and the case proceeded in their absence.
The parties were known to each other prior to the commencement of the tenancy with Mr Sissons having been [landlord’s] line manager at work.
The tenancy commenced on 28 July 2023 and was periodic.
On 15 May 2025, the Tribunal terminated the tenancy after finding it to have been abandoned on 21 April 2025. 1
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, and reimbursement of the filing fee. Burden of proof
The Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations.
One of the central expectations relates to onus of proof. With any claim before the Tribunal, it is the applicant who must establish the claim, or to put that another way, the applicant must prove the claim. If the applicant does not provide sufficient evidence and reasoning to establish the claim, then it must be dismissed.
The Tribunal requires the applicant to establish their claim to the balance of probabilities. That means that the applicant must show that what they are claiming is more likely than not. To put that into a mathematical context, the applicant must prove their claim to just over the 50% probability mark. Again, if the claim is not established to the balance of probability, it must be dismissed.

How much is owed for rent?

Section 61(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the “Act”) states that the Tribunal may terminate the tenancy where the premises have been abandoned and rent is in arrears.
Section 61(2) of the Act states that the Tribunal shall determine, as best it can on the evidence available before it, the date on which the landlord first became aware of, or ought to have been aware, that the tenant had abandoned the premises.
Section 61(3)(a) of the Act states that a tenant shall be liable to pay rent for a period of 21 days after the date determined by the Tribunal to have been the date the property was abandoned.
The Tribunal terminated the tenancy on 15 May 2025 after finding the property to have been abandoned on 21 April 2025.
The landlord provided up to date rent records that prove the amount owed. In accordance with section 61 of the Act the landlord is entitled to rent arrears to 12 May 2025 and the sum of $5,717.14 is ordered. 1 Melanie Lorraine Rowan, Jacob James Rowan v Mathew Sissons [2025] NZTT 5257133

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

With any claim from a landlord for compensation for damage to the premises, the landlord must prove that damage 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 49B, 66K(2)(a), and 66L of the Act.
Where the damage is caused carelessly, and is covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to the lesser of the insurance excess or four weeks' rent. See section 49B(3)(a) of the Act.
Where the damage is careless and is not covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to four weeks' rent (or market rent). See section 49B(3)(b) of the Act. Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. See section 49B(3A)(a) of the Act.
Tenants are liable for the cost of repairing damage that is intentional or which results from any activity at the premises that is an imprisonable offence. This applies to anything the tenant does and anything done by a person they are responsible for. See section 49B(1) of the Act.
Damage is intentional where a person intends to cause damage and takes the necessary steps to achieve that purpose. Damage is also intentional where a person does something, or allows a situation to continue, knowing that damage is a certainty. See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.

Is the tenant liable to pay compensation for a glazing repair in the front door?

The landlord seeks compensation to replace one of the glass panels in the front door they claim was broken by the tenant during the tenancy.
The landlord submitted an invoice for the cost of reglazing totalling $397.44.
The landlord provided the Tribunal with a text message from the tenant’s mother claiming the front door glazing was broken after the tenant moved out and was caused during a burglary.
There were no pre-tenancy photographs or inspection reports detailing the condition of the front door glazing at the commencement of the tenancy. Nor were any post tenancy photographs of the broken glazing provided.
Having considered all the evidence, I am not satisfied that the damage occurred during the tenancy and was the result of the tenant’s careless or intentional actions, or the actions of a person at the property with the tenant’s permission. The Tribunal can not discount that the glazing was broken during a burglary after the property was abandoned. The claim is dismissed.

Is the tenant liable to pay compensation for the rotten floor outside the bathroom?

The landlord claims the chipboard flooring immediately outside the bathroom was damaged during the tenancy. The landlord states they discovered the floor to be soft and rotten after visiting the property and finding it abandoned.
The landlord paid a contractor to undertake repairs to the floor. A one meter by one meter square of chipboard was removed and replaced and the existing underlay and carpet was re-laid. The landlord seeks $807.03 compensation.
During the hearing, the landlord provided the Tribunal with photographs taken at the commencement of the tenancy looking into the bathroom. These photographs show the condition of the flooring, bathroom, and shower to be clean and tidy with no obvious defects.
The landlord provided the Tribunal with photographs showing the condition of the flooring, from underneath the house, at the end of the tenancy. These photographs show an obvious wet patch in the chipboard. The landlord said her plumber inspected the water and wastewater pipes into the bathroom following the detection of the rotten flooring, but no leaks were detected.
Having considered all the evidence the Tribunal is satisfied that the damage occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. The Tribunal also considered that the damage to the flooring comprised of careless damage, meaning the tenant is liable for the remediation costs.
The end result is that the tenant must pay $807.30 for the floor remediation costs.

Is the tenant liable to pay compensation for the damaged garage door motor?

The landlord seeks compensation totalling $872.85 for damage to the garage door motor they say the tenant caused during the tenancy.
There are no pre-tenancy inspection photographs, reports or videos showing the condition of the garage door motor at the commencement of the tenancy.
There is one photograph of the garage door motor taken at the end of the tenancy.
Given the lack of evidence showing the condition of the garage door motor at the commencement of the tenancy the Tribunal cannot be satisfied damage occurred during the tenancy. The claim is dismissed.

Is the tenant liable for the cost of changing the locks?

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) the Act.
The landlord seeks $280.00 after instructing a lock smith to change the locks after the tenant failed to return the keys at the end of the tenancy.
The amount ordered is proved. Costs
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. Name Suppression.
Section 95A of the Act provides that on the application of a party that has been wholly or substantially successful in proceedings, the Tribunal must order that the name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that it is in the public interest to publish the names of the parties, or is justified because of the parties’ conduct, or any other circumstances of the case.
The landlord has been substantially successful and is granted name suppression.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5223771 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5223771 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Is the tenant liable to pay compensation for a glazing repair in the front door?

Is the tenant liable to pay compensation for the rotten floor outside the bathroom?

Is the tenant liable to pay compensation for the damaged garage door motor?

Is the tenant liable for the cost of changing the locks?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Is the tenant liable to pay compensation for a glazing repair in the front door?

Is the tenant liable to pay compensation for the rotten floor outside the bathroom?

Is the tenant liable to pay compensation for the damaged garage door motor?

Is the tenant liable for the cost of changing the locks?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions