How much money was awarded in case 5254139?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,232.57 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $169.27 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5254139?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5254139?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12275708-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5254139?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,232.57 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $169.27 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5254139?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5254139?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12275708-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5254139 — Rent arrears

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5254139 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenants’ names and identifying details.

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5254139 — net $2,560.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears (to 28/03/3035	$1,232.57	Rent arrears (to 28/03/3035
Water rates (agreed by consent	$169.27	Water rates (agreed by consent
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,560.00
Bond	$2,560.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,560.00

The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenants’ names and identifying details.

[The tenant/s] to pay Ihome Property Management Limited As Agent For Haichang Lai, Chunyu Liu $1,428.84 from the bond, calculated as shown in the table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,560.00 immediately apportioned as follows: Ihome Property Management Limited As Agent For Haichang Lai, Chunyu Liu: $1,428.84 [The tenant/s]: $1,131.16

Reasons

The matter was heard by video conference on 2 July 2025. The landlord attended by video conference. The tenants had technical issues joining by video link and therefore attended by teleconference.

This tenancy commenced on 19 January 2024 and ended on 28 March 2025. Rent was $640.00 per week and the bond lodged is $2,560.00.

The landlord seeks compensation for rent arrears of $1,232.57, water rates of $169.21, and reimbursement of an insurance excess of $750.00 relating to fire damage following the end of the tenancy. The total claim is $2,151.78, sought to be deducted from the bond. Relevant Law

Under section 40(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“the Act”), tenants must pay rent as it falls due and pay for outgoings such as water charges that they are liable for.

Section 49B of the Act sets out the liability of tenants for damage. Where a landlord establishes that damage occurred during the tenancy and that it is more than fair wear and tear, the tenant is presumed liable unless they prove the damage was not carelessly or intentionally caused or permitted. Where the damage is careless and covered by insurance, liability is limited to the lower of the excess or four weeks’ rent.

Tenants are liable for intentional damage, or damage arising from an imprisonable offence, with no limitation on liability: section 49B(1).

The onus rests with the landlord to establish their claim to the civil standard of proof, that is, on the balance of probabilities. Water Rates

The landlord claims $169.21 for water charges. The tenants do not dispute this sum. I am satisfied the landlord has established the claim. Rent Arrears

The landlord has provided a rent summary showing arrears of $1,232.57 to 28 March 2025. The landlord explained that three payments of $234.00 were originally allocated to water charges but have since been transferred to rent. The tenants challenged the arrears on the basis of difficulties in securing alternative accommodation and misunderstandings with the property manager but did not produce evidence of additional rent payments or errors in the landlord’s records.

I am satisfied the landlord has discharged the onus of proof. The arrears of $1,232.57 are established. Insurance Excess

The landlord seeks $750.00 being the insurance excess following a fire that damaged part of the property. The landlord relies on photographs and oral evidence, including recollections of a conversation where one of the tenants allegedly admitted the fire was caused by a barbecue. The tenants denied this and said the fire originated from a fridge left by a former tenant of the granny flat/sleep out at the property.

The Tribunal adjourned to allow production of the insurer’s loss adjuster’s report. That report, dated 22 January 2025, records the tenant’s explanation that the fire began in an old fridge moved from the granny flat/sleep out to the covered passageway. The report concluded the cause of ignition could not be determined but accepted the loss as sudden and accidental damage, claimable under the landlord’s insurance policy.

The Tribunal must apply the presumption under section 49B. The landlord has established that fire damage occurred during the tenancy and was more than fair wear and tear. However, I am not satisfied that the landlord has proved, on the balance of probabilities, that the tenants caused or permitted the fire damage through careless or intentional conduct. The insurer’s report supports an accidental cause, and there is insufficient evidence to show that the fire was caused by the tenants or by a person they permitted onto the premises.

As the landlord has not proved tenant responsibility, the claim for the insurance excess is dismissed. Filing fee and suppression order

The landlord has been substantially successful in the claim and therefore I consider it reasonable for the tenants to reimburse the filing fee. See section 102(2) of the Act.

The landlord does not seek a suppression order. In this case, the tenants have been partly successful in defending the landlord’s claim and consented to the claim for water rates. There are also sensitive circumstances surrounding the end of the tenancy. I consider there is no overriding public interest in publication. The balance of fairness favours suppression. See section 95A of the Act.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5254139 — net $2,560.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears (to 28/03/3035	$1,232.57	Rent arrears (to 28/03/3035
Water rates (agreed by consent	$169.27	Water rates (agreed by consent
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,560.00
Bond	$2,560.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,560.00

Order

The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenants’ names and identifying details.
[The tenant/s] to pay Ihome Property Management Limited As Agent For Haichang Lai, Chunyu Liu $1,428.84 from the bond, calculated as shown in the table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,560.00 immediately apportioned as follows: Ihome Property Management Limited As Agent For Haichang Lai, Chunyu Liu: $1,428.84 [The tenant/s]: $1,131.16

Reasons

The matter was heard by video conference on 2 July 2025. The landlord attended by video conference. The tenants had technical issues joining by video link and therefore attended by teleconference.
This tenancy commenced on 19 January 2024 and ended on 28 March 2025. Rent was $640.00 per week and the bond lodged is $2,560.00.
The landlord seeks compensation for rent arrears of $1,232.57, water rates of $169.21, and reimbursement of an insurance excess of $750.00 relating to fire damage following the end of the tenancy. The total claim is $2,151.78, sought to be deducted from the bond. Relevant Law
Under section 40(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“the Act”), tenants must pay rent as it falls due and pay for outgoings such as water charges that they are liable for.
Section 49B of the Act sets out the liability of tenants for damage. Where a landlord establishes that damage occurred during the tenancy and that it is more than fair wear and tear, the tenant is presumed liable unless they prove the damage was not carelessly or intentionally caused or permitted. Where the damage is careless and covered by insurance, liability is limited to the lower of the excess or four weeks’ rent.
Tenants are liable for intentional damage, or damage arising from an imprisonable offence, with no limitation on liability: section 49B(1).
The onus rests with the landlord to establish their claim to the civil standard of proof, that is, on the balance of probabilities. Water Rates
The landlord claims $169.21 for water charges. The tenants do not dispute this sum. I am satisfied the landlord has established the claim. Rent Arrears
The landlord has provided a rent summary showing arrears of $1,232.57 to 28 March 2025. The landlord explained that three payments of $234.00 were originally allocated to water charges but have since been transferred to rent. The tenants challenged the arrears on the basis of difficulties in securing alternative accommodation and misunderstandings with the property manager but did not produce evidence of additional rent payments or errors in the landlord’s records.
I am satisfied the landlord has discharged the onus of proof. The arrears of $1,232.57 are established. Insurance Excess
The landlord seeks $750.00 being the insurance excess following a fire that damaged part of the property. The landlord relies on photographs and oral evidence, including recollections of a conversation where one of the tenants allegedly admitted the fire was caused by a barbecue. The tenants denied this and said the fire originated from a fridge left by a former tenant of the granny flat/sleep out at the property.
The Tribunal adjourned to allow production of the insurer’s loss adjuster’s report. That report, dated 22 January 2025, records the tenant’s explanation that the fire began in an old fridge moved from the granny flat/sleep out to the covered passageway. The report concluded the cause of ignition could not be determined but accepted the loss as sudden and accidental damage, claimable under the landlord’s insurance policy.
The Tribunal must apply the presumption under section 49B. The landlord has established that fire damage occurred during the tenancy and was more than fair wear and tear. However, I am not satisfied that the landlord has proved, on the balance of probabilities, that the tenants caused or permitted the fire damage through careless or intentional conduct. The insurer’s report supports an accidental cause, and there is insufficient evidence to show that the fire was caused by the tenants or by a person they permitted onto the premises.
As the landlord has not proved tenant responsibility, the claim for the insurance excess is dismissed. Filing fee and suppression order
The landlord has been substantially successful in the claim and therefore I consider it reasonable for the tenants to reimburse the filing fee. See section 102(2) of the Act.
The landlord does not seek a suppression order. In this case, the tenants have been partly successful in defending the landlord’s claim and consented to the claim for water rates. There are also sensitive circumstances surrounding the end of the tenancy. I consider there is no overriding public interest in publication. The balance of fairness favours suppression. See section 95A of the Act.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5254139 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5254139 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions