Published tribunal order
Tenancy Tribunal case 5274361 — Property damage at 1 Purakau Lane, Pakuranga, Auckland 2010
Decided 17 Jul 2025 · Published 17 Jul 2025 · Application 5274361
Mixed / unclear
- Property damage
Order
- The tenant must carry out the following work to the premises, which must be completed by Sunday 3 August 2025: a. Interior of property to be cleaned, free from rubbish. b. Clean sink, kitchen bench and rangehood. c. Clean cupboards inside and out. d. Clean the bathtub, shower, basin and toilet. e. Wash the walls and ceiling, particularly in kitchen. f. Wash the vinyl floors in kitchen, bathroom and toilets. g. Tidy and weed the garden. h. Remove all house and garden rubbish.
- If the tenant fails to comply with Order 1, then the landlord may undertake the work and charge the tenant the costs of this work up to $1750.00. These costs may be treated as rent in arrears and enforced accordingly.
- The landlord may replace or repair the following and charge the tenant up to the cost specified for each action below. The costs may be treated as rent in arrears and enforced accordingly: a. Replace the stove at a cost to the tenant of up to $675.00, b. Remove the carpet and replace with vinyl flooring at a cost to the tenant of up to $4,000, and c. Repair the hole in the lounge room wall at a cost to the tenant of up to $105.00.
Reasons
- The landlord attended the hearing, conducted via teleconference. Two calls to the tenant went unanswered and to voicemail. After the first call went to voicemail, a brief message was left introducing myself and explaining the purpose of the call. The message concluded with the advice I would try a second time after waiting some minutes. I was satisfied adequate service had completed and I continued with the hearing after the second call also went unanswered.
- The landlord claims that the tenant has failed to keep the premises reasonable clean and tidy and free from rubbish. It also claims damage such that: a. the house lot of carpet is beyond repair and needs replacing, b. the stove is beyond repair and requires replacing, and c. a hole in the lounge room wall needs repair and repainting.
- The landlord wants the problems fixed.
- Under sections 40(1)(c)-(d) and 40(2)(a), Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”), a tenant has specific obligations in relation to the tenancy premises.
- Where the Tribunal finds the tenant has failed to comply with any of these obligations, where appropriate it may make an order for the landlord to carry out the work or replacement. See section 78(1)(d)-(e) RTA.
- A work order may also authorise the landlord to undertake the work and charge the tenant the costs of doing the work, if the tenant should fail to comply with the work order. A monetary limit must be imposed by the Tribunal on the amount of costs that can be charged. These costs can be treated as rent in arrears and enforced accordingly. See sections 78(2AAB) and 78(2AAC)(a) RTA.
Has the tenant failed to comply with their obligations?
- This tenancy commenced 2 September 2020. The premises was “as new” at that time.
- The landlord has noticed a deterioration in the upkeep of the premises by the tenant. At least three notices to remedy have been served on the tenant with follow-up meetings where possible. The first was dated 7 April 2022, the second dated 8 October 2024, and the third on 5 May 2025. Each notice has carried over much of the prior tasks requested, and added further issues. A police report detailing concerns about the condition of the premises was also received on or around 13 February 2025. I have not considered any grounds exist here to deem any failure to mitigate by the landlord (see section 49 RTA), given the efforts to date and more recent decline. However, any future landlord claims for compensation relating to the reinstated furnishings or chattels provided for here may require some explanations of how historic failings were not avoided from repeating.
- The landlord provided photos of a visit by the landlord and contractors to assess and quote for the remedial and repair actions required. The quote from this visit has been provided and used as a basis for setting the cap on costs in this order.
- Based on the photographic evidence filed in support by the landlord I am satisfied that the tenant has breached her obligations in this and the tasks in this order, and the landlord repairs as provided are proven as necessary.
What costs should be allowed for?
- The quotes as provided have been accepted in full but the vinyl laying and stove should attract some consideration of depreciation, given both are some five years old. I have applied an approximately 1/3 rd reduction to the quoted costs to reflect this. The landlord was asked about an alternative approach of a deep clean of the existing carpet. He stated it had been considered but rejected because of the poor condition and damage to the carpet. The use of vinyl as an alternative flooring for this tenancy would seem prudent based on the evidenced condition of the carpet. It should be more robust as well as being easier for the tenant to maintain going forward.
- The landlord confirmed the stove is beyond repair. It is badly damaged and only one element of four was reported as working. I have applied the same (1/3rd) depreciation to this cost.
- The landlord concluded the hearing with the recent advice from local management the tenant has engaged with whanau and support recently and appears to be making some improvements as required in this work order. That is encouraging.