What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5276540 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 5276540?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Investigate Drain Blockage And Have…: $1,910.74 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5276540?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5276540?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12176014-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5276540 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 5276540?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Investigate Drain Blockage And Have…: $1,910.74 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5276540?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5276540?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12176014-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5276540 — Tenancy dispute

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5276540 — net $1,937.74 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Investigate drain blockage and have drains cleared of baby wipes	$1,910.74	Investigate drain blockage and have drains cleared of baby wipes
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,937.74
Bond	$2,000.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,937.74

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name and identifying details.
Rira Moanaroa to pay [The landlord] $1,937.74 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,000.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: [The landlord]: $1,937.74 Rira Moanaroa: $62.26

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not.
I am satisfied that the tenant had received proper notice of the hearing time, date and place and chose not to attend.
The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Service of notice of hearing on tenant
The tenancy ended on `20 March 2025. The application to the Tribunal was made more than 2 months after the termination of the tenancy, being 30 May 2025.
Section 91AA of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) states “If the landlord files an application more than 2 months after the termination of the tenancy to which it relates, any notice or other document required to be served on the tenant relating to the application must be given to or served on the tenant— (a) personally; or (b) by posting it to a contact address that the tenant has supplied to the landlord in writing within the 2 months before the application; or (c) by delivering it to the place where the tenant now lives and giving it to any person appearing to be aged 16 years or older who appears to be residing at that place and who confirms that the tenant resides there; or (d) by giving it to any solicitor or other agent of the tenant duly authorised by the tenant to receive service on his or her behalf” or (e)if the landlord files the application no later than 2 years after the termination of the tenancy to which it relates, by transmission to an email address given by the tenant as an address for service; or (f)if the landlord files the application more than 2 years after the termination of the tenancy to which it relates, by transmission to an email address that the tenant has used to communicate with the landlord, or otherwise supplied to the landlord in writing, within the 2 years before the application”.
The notice of hearing and other evidence provided by the landlord has been served on the tenant to the email address for service provided on the tenancy agreement. I am satisfied that the notice and/or other document has been served on the tenant in accordance with the RTA.

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.
During the tenancy, the tenant blocked the sewage pipes at the premise with baby wipes. This required a plumber to be called to investigate the cause of the blockage and a drainage expert to be called to look at the sewage pipes with CCTV and then clear the sewage pipes of a significant amount of baby wipes. I am satisfied the damage is from careless acts by the tenant and that the damage is more than fair wear and tear. The tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved.
I have considered betterment and depreciation. The landlord should 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. In calculating depreciation, I have considered the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Reimbursement of the filing fee
Section 102(4) of the RTA confirms that applicants that are wholly or substantially successful in proving their claims will have their filing fee reimbursed.
Because [The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee. Name suppression
The landlord applies for non-publication of its name and identifying details.
The Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
The landlord has wholly succeeded in its proceedings. I do not consider publication is in the public interest or justified because of the landlord’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
Non-publication is ordered.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5276540 — net $1,937.74 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Investigate drain blockage and have drains cleared of baby wipes	$1,910.74	Investigate drain blockage and have drains cleared of baby wipes
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,937.74
Bond	$2,000.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,937.74

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name and identifying details.
Rira Moanaroa to pay [The landlord] $1,937.74 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,000.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: [The landlord]: $1,937.74 Rira Moanaroa: $62.26

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not.
I am satisfied that the tenant had received proper notice of the hearing time, date and place and chose not to attend.
The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Service of notice of hearing on tenant
The tenancy ended on `20 March 2025. The application to the Tribunal was made more than 2 months after the termination of the tenancy, being 30 May 2025.
Section 91AA of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) states “If the landlord files an application more than 2 months after the termination of the tenancy to which it relates, any notice or other document required to be served on the tenant relating to the application must be given to or served on the tenant— (a) personally; or (b) by posting it to a contact address that the tenant has supplied to the landlord in writing within the 2 months before the application; or (c) by delivering it to the place where the tenant now lives and giving it to any person appearing to be aged 16 years or older who appears to be residing at that place and who confirms that the tenant resides there; or (d) by giving it to any solicitor or other agent of the tenant duly authorised by the tenant to receive service on his or her behalf” or (e)if the landlord files the application no later than 2 years after the termination of the tenancy to which it relates, by transmission to an email address given by the tenant as an address for service; or (f)if the landlord files the application more than 2 years after the termination of the tenancy to which it relates, by transmission to an email address that the tenant has used to communicate with the landlord, or otherwise supplied to the landlord in writing, within the 2 years before the application”.
The notice of hearing and other evidence provided by the landlord has been served on the tenant to the email address for service provided on the tenancy agreement. I am satisfied that the notice and/or other document has been served on the tenant in accordance with the RTA.

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.
During the tenancy, the tenant blocked the sewage pipes at the premise with baby wipes. This required a plumber to be called to investigate the cause of the blockage and a drainage expert to be called to look at the sewage pipes with CCTV and then clear the sewage pipes of a significant amount of baby wipes. I am satisfied the damage is from careless acts by the tenant and that the damage is more than fair wear and tear. The tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved.
I have considered betterment and depreciation. The landlord should 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. In calculating depreciation, I have considered the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Reimbursement of the filing fee
Section 102(4) of the RTA confirms that applicants that are wholly or substantially successful in proving their claims will have their filing fee reimbursed.
Because [The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee. Name suppression
The landlord applies for non-publication of its name and identifying details.
The Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
The landlord has wholly succeeded in its proceedings. I do not consider publication is in the public interest or justified because of the landlord’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
Non-publication is ordered.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5276540 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5276540 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions