What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5266460 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] must pay Hallbury Holdings Limited $1,694.07 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 5266460?

Cleaning: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Plumbing Invoice (By Consent: $463.45 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $403.62 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5266460?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5266460?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12442599-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5266460 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] must pay Hallbury Holdings Limited $1,694.07 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 5266460?

Cleaning: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Plumbing Invoice (By Consent: $463.45 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $403.62 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5266460?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5266460?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12442599-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

79 Maces Road, Bromley, Christchurch 8062 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5266460 — Cleanliness

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5266460 — net $1,694.07 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 17.5.25	$100.00	The claim for rent arrears is proven. Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?
Rubbish removal	$403.62	Rubbish removal
Cleaning	$500.00	Cleaning
Carpet Cleaning	$200.00	Carpet Cleaning
Repairs: Plumbing invoice (by consent	$463.45	Repairs: Plumbing invoice (by consent
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,694.07
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,694.07

Order

[The tenant/s] must pay Hallbury Holdings Limited $1,694.07 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. There was no appearance by the tenant.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations.
That includes a requirement that the party bringing the claim (the applicant), establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”.
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.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 17 May 2025. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy. The landlord confirmed during the hearing that the bond has been released and applied towards the rent debt, leaving a balance payable of $100.00.
Having sighted the landlord’s evidence filed in support I am satisfied that the tenant is responsible for the outstanding balance.
The claim for rent arrears is proven.

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 tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. Cleaning
The landlord says that the tenant did not leave the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy condition. The landlord has provided an invoice from a professional cleaner for $500.00 dated 22 May 2025. The landlord says that the cleaning took a number of days. Based on the photographic evidence provided I am satisfied that the amount claimed is reasonable. Rubbish removal
The tenant left behind a significant amount of rubbish and old furniture. The landlord had to have everything removed, costing $403.62 which included tip fees. I have sighted photographic evidence provided in support of this claim. Based on the photographic evidence provided I am satisfied that the tenant breached his obligations in this regard.
The claim relating to rubbish removal has been established. Blocked toilet and bathroom vanity
The landlord claims that the tenant blocked the toilet. The vanity handbasin was also blocked which required the services of a plumber to remedy. The landlord provided an invoice from Aotea Plumbing and Drainage dated 11 October 2024. The tenant had also signed the invoice agreeing to pay $30.00 per week towards the amount charged. The landlord confirmed during the hearing that no payments have been received in respect of this cost.
This claim is allowed by consent. Carpet cleaning
The landlord says that the tenant damaged the carpet by having a pet. The carpet also had to be professionally cleaned.
An invoice from Troy Robertson dated 13 June 2025 has been provided in support of this claim. The invoice notes a patch repair to the carpet as a result of pet damage. Also included in the invoice is a charge relating to repairs to the kitchen bench.
As discussed with the landlord during the hearing there is a notable absence of evidence in support of their application. The Tribunal has not been provided with incoming inspection evidence. There is also inadequate evidence provided which confirms the condition of the premises at the end of the tenancy. There is also no incoming evidence which confirms the condition of the benchtop at the beginning of the tenancy, nor is there evidence confirming damage to the carpet.
For these reasons the landlord’s claim in respect of the invoice from Troy Robertson for carpet cleaning is allowed. The remaining claims relating to carpet and bench top repair have not been established.
The amounts ordered are proved.
The claim relating to garage rubbish removal and associated tip fees must also be dismissed. The landlord has failed to provide the required evidence in support of these two claims.

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: fence repairs, door lock and key replacement, door removal and refit, repairs to walls, ceiling lights and clothesline repairs.
The landlord has applied for compensation for the cost of fence repairs, replacing a door lock and keys, door removal and refit, repairing damage to walls, replacing ceiling lights and bulbs, and repairing the clothesline. However, the landlord has not provided sufficient evidence to establish that these losses were caused by the tenant or that the claimed work was necessary. As recorded earlier there is an absence of critical evidence confirming the condition of the property at the start and conclusion of the tenancy relating to these claims.
In the absence of supporting documentation such as photographs, inspection reports, or other credible evidence, I am not satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the tenant is responsible for these alleged damages or that the amounts claimed reflect actual loss.
Accordingly, the landlord’s application for compensation relating to the invoice from Handy Andy is declined due to insufficient evidence.
Because Hallbury Holdings Limited has had some success with their application I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5266460 — net $1,694.07 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 17.5.25	$100.00	The claim for rent arrears is proven. Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?
Rubbish removal	$403.62	Rubbish removal
Cleaning	$500.00	Cleaning
Carpet Cleaning	$200.00	Carpet Cleaning
Repairs: Plumbing invoice (by consent	$463.45	Repairs: Plumbing invoice (by consent
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,694.07
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,694.07

Order

[The tenant/s] must pay Hallbury Holdings Limited $1,694.07 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. There was no appearance by the tenant.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations.
That includes a requirement that the party bringing the claim (the applicant), establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”.
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.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 17 May 2025. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy. The landlord confirmed during the hearing that the bond has been released and applied towards the rent debt, leaving a balance payable of $100.00.
Having sighted the landlord’s evidence filed in support I am satisfied that the tenant is responsible for the outstanding balance.
The claim for rent arrears is proven.

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 tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. Cleaning
The landlord says that the tenant did not leave the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy condition. The landlord has provided an invoice from a professional cleaner for $500.00 dated 22 May 2025. The landlord says that the cleaning took a number of days. Based on the photographic evidence provided I am satisfied that the amount claimed is reasonable. Rubbish removal
The tenant left behind a significant amount of rubbish and old furniture. The landlord had to have everything removed, costing $403.62 which included tip fees. I have sighted photographic evidence provided in support of this claim. Based on the photographic evidence provided I am satisfied that the tenant breached his obligations in this regard.
The claim relating to rubbish removal has been established. Blocked toilet and bathroom vanity
The landlord claims that the tenant blocked the toilet. The vanity handbasin was also blocked which required the services of a plumber to remedy. The landlord provided an invoice from Aotea Plumbing and Drainage dated 11 October 2024. The tenant had also signed the invoice agreeing to pay $30.00 per week towards the amount charged. The landlord confirmed during the hearing that no payments have been received in respect of this cost.
This claim is allowed by consent. Carpet cleaning
The landlord says that the tenant damaged the carpet by having a pet. The carpet also had to be professionally cleaned.
An invoice from Troy Robertson dated 13 June 2025 has been provided in support of this claim. The invoice notes a patch repair to the carpet as a result of pet damage. Also included in the invoice is a charge relating to repairs to the kitchen bench.
As discussed with the landlord during the hearing there is a notable absence of evidence in support of their application. The Tribunal has not been provided with incoming inspection evidence. There is also inadequate evidence provided which confirms the condition of the premises at the end of the tenancy. There is also no incoming evidence which confirms the condition of the benchtop at the beginning of the tenancy, nor is there evidence confirming damage to the carpet.
For these reasons the landlord’s claim in respect of the invoice from Troy Robertson for carpet cleaning is allowed. The remaining claims relating to carpet and bench top repair have not been established.
The amounts ordered are proved.
The claim relating to garage rubbish removal and associated tip fees must also be dismissed. The landlord has failed to provide the required evidence in support of these two claims.

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: fence repairs, door lock and key replacement, door removal and refit, repairs to walls, ceiling lights and clothesline repairs.
The landlord has applied for compensation for the cost of fence repairs, replacing a door lock and keys, door removal and refit, repairing damage to walls, replacing ceiling lights and bulbs, and repairing the clothesline. However, the landlord has not provided sufficient evidence to establish that these losses were caused by the tenant or that the claimed work was necessary. As recorded earlier there is an absence of critical evidence confirming the condition of the property at the start and conclusion of the tenancy relating to these claims.
In the absence of supporting documentation such as photographs, inspection reports, or other credible evidence, I am not satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the tenant is responsible for these alleged damages or that the amounts claimed reflect actual loss.
Accordingly, the landlord’s application for compensation relating to the invoice from Handy Andy is declined due to insufficient evidence.
Because Hallbury Holdings Limited has had some success with their application I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5266460 — Cleanliness at 79 Maces Road, Bromley, Christchurch 8062

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5266460 — Cleanliness at 79 Maces Road, Bromley, Christchurch 8062

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

Property management

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions