Published tribunal order
Tenancy Tribunal case 5230473 — Property damage
Decided 10 Jul 2025 · Published 10 Jul 2025 · Application 5230473
- Property damage
Party names are redacted in the official published order.
Order
- An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the [Tenant] name and identifying details.
- [Tenant] to pay $2,210.95 immediately, calculated as follows: Award DescriptionAmount Rent arrears to 5 March 2025 (less bond)$880.00 Wall damage – plastering and spot painting$281.18 Reglazing broken windows (approved portion)$1,022.77 Filing fee reimbursement$27.00 Total$2,210.95
Reasons
- The Landlord attended the hearing.
- The Landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
How much is owed for rent?
- The tenancy ended on 5 March 2025. The Landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy: $880.00 (the bond was released and apportioned against the arrears balance at the end of the tenancy).
Is the tenant responsible for the damage to 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. See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA.
- Where the damage is careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.
- 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 (or four weeks' market rent in the case of a tenant paying income- related rent). See section 49B(3)(a) RTA.
- 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) RTA. 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) RTA.
- 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) RTA.
- 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.
- The following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. Holes in walls. There were holes behind the front door and first bedroom which required plastering and painting, a hole in the bathroom door, and damage wall surfaces in the bedroom three. The costs of patching and spot painting these surfaces was $281.18 including labour and materials. The damage is established on the Landlord’s photographic evidence as more than fair wear and tear. I approve this claim. b. Reglazing broken windows, authorised by tenant as a credit. Windows broken during the tenancy were approved for repair and payment by the Landlord. The Landlord now seeks reimbursement of the cost of those repairs, totalling $1,312.77 (including multiple callouts on some occasions, and repairs after-hours). I do not have sufficient information regarding after hours charges. I approve the three window reglazing claims in the amount of $1,022.77. (I have no photographs of the broken windows and have put primary emphasis on the property manager’s oral evidence.)
- The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
- The amounts ordered are proved.
- I have taken 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. In calculating depreciation, I have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.