How much money was awarded in case 5252554?

Cleaning: $313.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $1,400.00 awarded to landlord; Smoke Alarms: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $115.00 awarded to landlord; Lost Rent: $730.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $3,220.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $312.85 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Curtains: $242.00 awarded to landlord; Smoke Alarms: $57.50 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,682.80 awarded to landlord; Storage: $525.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5252554?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5252554?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12004712-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5252554?

Cleaning: $313.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $1,400.00 awarded to landlord; Smoke Alarms: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $115.00 awarded to landlord; Lost Rent: $730.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $3,220.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $312.85 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Curtains: $242.00 awarded to landlord; Smoke Alarms: $57.50 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,682.80 awarded to landlord; Storage: $525.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5252554?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5252554?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12004712-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

5A Brodie Lane, Feilding, Feilding 4702 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5252554 — Property damage

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5252554 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5252554 — net $9,125.15 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to vacate date	$312.85	Rent arrears to vacate date
Rubbish removal	$1,682.80	Rubbish removal
Cleaning	$1,400.00	Cleaning
Carpet Cleaning	$313.00	Carpet Cleaning
Lawns and Garden work	$115.00	Lawns and Garden work
Replace furnishings: curtains	$242.00	Replace furnishings: curtains
Replace furnishings: smoke alarm	$57.50	Replace furnishings: smoke alarm
Exemplary damages: smoke alarm	$500.00	smoke alarm
Storage	$525.00	Storage
Compensation for lost rent	$730.00	Compensation for lost rent
__________________________________________________________________________________ 52525542 Repairs	$3,220.00	__________________________________________________________________________________ 52525542 Repairs
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$9,125.15
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$9,125.15

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.

Khyisha Dominique Te Riwhi Nicholls and Matthew Lee Torstonson must pay [The landlord/s] $9,125.15 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

[The landlord/s] must take any of the tenant’s personal documents that have been left at the premises to the nearest Police station and obtain a receipt for them.

The landlord may dispose of the other goods left at the premises by the tenant as the landlord sees fit. DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears to vacate date$312.85 Rubbish removal$1,682.80 Cleaning$1,400.00 Carpet Cleaning$313.00 Lawns and Garden work$115.00 Replace furnishings: curtains$242.00 Replace furnishings: smoke alarm$57.50 Exemplary damages: smoke alarm$500.00 Storage$525.00 Compensation for lost rent$730.00 Repairs$3,220.00 Filing fee reimbursement$27.00 Total award$9,125.15 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$9,125.15

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 was terminated on 5 February 2025 but the tenant did not vacate the property until three days later. The landlord is entitled to a further three days rent.

The landlord claimed three weeks rent as compensation for the time it took the landlord to remove all rubbish and possessions, clean the property and complete repairs so that the property could be rented.

The landlord’s business is that of a residential landlord. It is to be expected that as part of the usual operation of that business, a property may be vacant for a period of two weeks between tenancies. This is a usual cost involved in the landlord’s business. Here, the failure by the tenant to clear the property of their extensive possessions and rubbish and the nature and scale of the damage they caused, means that the loss the landlord suffered was reasonably foreseeable. It is appropriate that the landlord be compensated for their loss with one week’s rent.

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 photographic evidence that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. The evidence shows that the tenant took what they wanted and moved out without making any attempt to remove substantial amounts of rubbish and discarded items, or to clean the property.

The smoke alarm had been removed by the tenant. The landlord is entitled to reimbursement for its replacement.

The amounts ordered are proved. Exemplary damages: smoke alarm removal

The landlord claimed the tenant removed the smoke alarm.

A tenant must not cause or permit any interference with, or render inoperative, any means of escape from fire within the meaning of the Building Act 2004. See section 40(2)(ab) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The definition of “means of escape” includes “all active and passive protection features required to warn people of fire...”, which covers smoke alarms.

Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $4,000.00. See section 40(3A)(b) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

The landlord’s evidence confirms that the tenant removed the smoke alarm. The tenant has committed an unlawful act.

Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied that it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. See section 109(3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Exemplary damages are different from ordinary damages where the object is generally to compensate. The object of exemplary damages is to punish and deter. It is important that tenants be deterred from removing smoke alarms because their removal is a serious safety risk to both the property of the landlord and the lives of the tenants. Their removal may have a negative impact on the landlord’s insurance.

It is appropriate that an award of $500.00 of exemplary damages is ordered.

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 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. There were 21 holes in the internal walls, two of them of a substantial size. b. A makeshift barricade had been erected by nailing battens to the house and damaging the weatherboards. c. The main bedroom door had been removed and both sides broken with punch or kick holes. d. Curtains had been chewed by the tenant’s dog and required replacement. e. Five window latches were broken.

From its nature and extent, all the damage was intentional. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The amounts ordered are proved. Disposal of tenant’s goods

The landlord has applied for the disposal of goods the tenant left at the premises at the end of the tenancy.

The landlord has tried to contact the tenant on numerous occasions but has been unable to get the tenant to come and collect the tenants’ goods.

It is not practicable for the landlord to the return the goods to the tenant. The value of the goods is below the cost of storing, transporting and selling them. Therefore the landlord may dispose of the goods. See sections 62(3)(b), 62B(2) and (3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

The landlord has had to store the tenant’s goods pending this hearing and the Tribunal granting a disposal order. It is appropriate that the landlord be compensated for this at the modest rate claimed of $15.00 per day. Filing fee

Because the landlord has been wholly successful in their claim, the Tribunal is required to reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5252554 — net $9,125.15 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to vacate date	$312.85	Rent arrears to vacate date
Rubbish removal	$1,682.80	Rubbish removal
Cleaning	$1,400.00	Cleaning
Carpet Cleaning	$313.00	Carpet Cleaning
Lawns and Garden work	$115.00	Lawns and Garden work
Replace furnishings: curtains	$242.00	Replace furnishings: curtains
Replace furnishings: smoke alarm	$57.50	Replace furnishings: smoke alarm
Exemplary damages: smoke alarm	$500.00	smoke alarm
Storage	$525.00	Storage
Compensation for lost rent	$730.00	Compensation for lost rent
__________________________________________________________________________________ 52525542 Repairs	$3,220.00	__________________________________________________________________________________ 52525542 Repairs
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$9,125.15
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$9,125.15

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
Khyisha Dominique Te Riwhi Nicholls and Matthew Lee Torstonson must pay [The landlord/s] $9,125.15 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
[The landlord/s] must take any of the tenant’s personal documents that have been left at the premises to the nearest Police station and obtain a receipt for them.
The landlord may dispose of the other goods left at the premises by the tenant as the landlord sees fit. DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears to vacate date$312.85 Rubbish removal$1,682.80 Cleaning$1,400.00 Carpet Cleaning$313.00 Lawns and Garden work$115.00 Replace furnishings: curtains$242.00 Replace furnishings: smoke alarm$57.50 Exemplary damages: smoke alarm$500.00 Storage$525.00 Compensation for lost rent$730.00 Repairs$3,220.00 Filing fee reimbursement$27.00 Total award$9,125.15 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$9,125.15

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 was terminated on 5 February 2025 but the tenant did not vacate the property until three days later. The landlord is entitled to a further three days rent.
The landlord claimed three weeks rent as compensation for the time it took the landlord to remove all rubbish and possessions, clean the property and complete repairs so that the property could be rented.
The landlord’s business is that of a residential landlord. It is to be expected that as part of the usual operation of that business, a property may be vacant for a period of two weeks between tenancies. This is a usual cost involved in the landlord’s business. Here, the failure by the tenant to clear the property of their extensive possessions and rubbish and the nature and scale of the damage they caused, means that the loss the landlord suffered was reasonably foreseeable. It is appropriate that the landlord be compensated for their loss with one week’s rent.

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 photographic evidence that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. The evidence shows that the tenant took what they wanted and moved out without making any attempt to remove substantial amounts of rubbish and discarded items, or to clean the property.
The smoke alarm had been removed by the tenant. The landlord is entitled to reimbursement for its replacement.
The amounts ordered are proved. Exemplary damages: smoke alarm removal
The landlord claimed the tenant removed the smoke alarm.
A tenant must not cause or permit any interference with, or render inoperative, any means of escape from fire within the meaning of the Building Act 2004. See section 40(2)(ab) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The definition of “means of escape” includes “all active and passive protection features required to warn people of fire...”, which covers smoke alarms.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $4,000.00. See section 40(3A)(b) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord’s evidence confirms that the tenant removed the smoke alarm. The tenant has committed an unlawful act.
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied that it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. See section 109(3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Exemplary damages are different from ordinary damages where the object is generally to compensate. The object of exemplary damages is to punish and deter. It is important that tenants be deterred from removing smoke alarms because their removal is a serious safety risk to both the property of the landlord and the lives of the tenants. Their removal may have a negative impact on the landlord’s insurance.
It is appropriate that an award of $500.00 of exemplary damages is ordered.

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 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. There were 21 holes in the internal walls, two of them of a substantial size. b. A makeshift barricade had been erected by nailing battens to the house and damaging the weatherboards. c. The main bedroom door had been removed and both sides broken with punch or kick holes. d. Curtains had been chewed by the tenant’s dog and required replacement. e. Five window latches were broken.
From its nature and extent, all the damage was intentional. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved. Disposal of tenant’s goods
The landlord has applied for the disposal of goods the tenant left at the premises at the end of the tenancy.
The landlord has tried to contact the tenant on numerous occasions but has been unable to get the tenant to come and collect the tenants’ goods.
It is not practicable for the landlord to the return the goods to the tenant. The value of the goods is below the cost of storing, transporting and selling them. Therefore the landlord may dispose of the goods. See sections 62(3)(b), 62B(2) and (3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord has had to store the tenant’s goods pending this hearing and the Tribunal granting a disposal order. It is appropriate that the landlord be compensated for this at the modest rate claimed of $15.00 per day. Filing fee
Because the landlord has been wholly successful in their claim, the Tribunal is required to reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5252554 — Property damage at 5A Brodie Lane, Feilding, Feilding 4702

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5252554 — Property damage at 5A Brodie Lane, Feilding, Feilding 4702

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions