What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5272323 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] tenant/s], [The tenant/s] tenant/s], [The tenant/s] tenant/s], [The tenant/s] party]

How much money was awarded in case 5272323?

Individual award amounts are in the official MoJ PDF. Claim amounts appear on this page when claims and net totals reconcile.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5272323?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5272323?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12281298-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5272323 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] tenant/s], [The tenant/s] tenant/s], [The tenant/s] tenant/s], [The tenant/s] party]

How much money was awarded in case 5272323?

Individual award amounts are in the official MoJ PDF. Claim amounts appear on this page when claims and net totals reconcile.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5272323?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5272323?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12281298-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

13 Westall Road, New Lynn, Auckland 0600 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5272323 — Rent arrears

Order

[The tenant/s] tenant/s], [The tenant/s] tenant/s], [The tenant/s] tenant/s], [The tenant/s] party] and [The tenant/s] tenant/s] must pay Ai Homes Real Estate Limited As Agent For T&C Family Trust $14,092.07 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,600.00 (5863519-001) to Ai Homes Real Estate Limited As Agent For T&C Family Trust immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing, represented by Ms Wei. The tenants did not attend.
Less than an hour before the hearing was scheduled to begin, the Tribunal received an email requesting an adjournment because the writer and her sisters were experiencing “flu and COVID-like symptoms”. The letter was signed off “Toe, Kay, Tala”. No medical information was provided in support of the application.
A decision on whether to grant an adjournment was not made before the hearing time. When the landlord arrived and the hearing began, the first matter discussed was the adjournment. The landlord opposed the adjournment because of the large amount of arrears and compensation being sought, and also because of the time passed since the end of the tenancy.
Having considered the landlord’s position as well as the tenants’ position I declined the adjournment request. I am not satisfied that none of the tenants were able to attend, that any of the tenants were so unwell as to be able to attend, or that it was not possible to at least attend by teleconference.
I also note the claim is for a large amount, and the applicant has the right to have the matter heard in timely manner.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

The tenancy ended on 30 May 2025. The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy was $9,328.57 for rent arrears and $1,120.70 for water rates.

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 and remove all rubbish. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord produced photographs that show the premises to be in excellent condition at the start of the tenancy. Photographs from the end of the tenancy show a huge amount of rubbish left inside and outside the premises. No attempt at tidying or cleaning the premises appears to have been made. The walls were left very dirty with several holes and dents in the gib-board. The carpet has many stains, some pink or orange, and others showing darker spots.
The landlord produced invoices for removal of the rubbish, ($1,798.00) and for cleaning ($632.50).
The landlord produced photographs that show the lawns were left uncut at the end of the tenancy. The landlord is claiming $40.00 for lawn mowing.
These amounts are proved.

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.
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.
As stated above, at the end of the tenancy, there were several holes and dents in the gib-board walls and the carpet was badly marked.
The landlord stated that the owner purchased the property in 2024, and these were the first tenants the landlord put into this property.
The landlord is claiming $14,319.47 to repaint the whole of the interior of the house, and $10,100.34 to replace the carpet.
The damage exceeds fair wear and tear, and the tenants have not disproved liability for the damage.
However, I am not persuaded that the entire house needed repainting as a result of careless and intentional damage caused during the tenancy. Photographs show a large hole in the wall of bedroom four and several other places, but mainly dirty marks in bedrooms three and five and most of the rest of the premises.
I must take into account betterment and depreciation. The landlord must 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. To make an award to repaint the whole house would in my view leave the landlord much better off than they were at the beginning of the tenancy.
Similarly, whereas the carpet was in excellent condition at the start of the tenancy, the landlord accepts that by the end of the tenancy it was probably three or four years old. The IRD Depreciation Guidelines IR265 gives carpets in a rental tenancy a lifespan of 8 years. Moreover I am not persuaded that the carpet for the whole house needed replacing as a result of careless or intentional damage.
In calculating depreciation, I have taken into account the age and condition of the paintwork and the carpet items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. The award I have made is for approximately 25% of the full replacement cost of the carpet and 20% of the cost for painting.
The landlord produced photographs of a door handle that had all-but been pulled off a door. The landlord is claiming $100.00 to replace the door handle.
The landlord is claiming $225.00 to replace a television that had been mounted on the wall in the master bedroom. The television was undamaged at the beginning of the tenancy and had a cracked screen at the end of the tenancy. By the end of the tenancy the television was several years old.
The amounts ordered are proved.
The landlord is claiming $1,252.35 to replace the garage door. The landlord stated the tenants removed “the chain”. No photographs were produced in support of this claim and there is insufficient detail about the damage to persuade me that the tenants have carelessly or intentionally damaged the garage door.
This claim is not proved.
Because Ai Homes Real Estate Limited As Agent For T&C Family Trust has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5272323 — Rent arrears at 13 Westall Road, New Lynn, Auckland 0600

Tenancy Tribunal case 5272323 — Rent arrears at 13 Westall Road, New Lynn, Auckland 0600

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

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

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Property management

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

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

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Property management

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.