What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5282833 about?

The tribunal order states: The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,280.00 (6527337-001) immediately

How much money was awarded in case 5282833?

Cleaning: $264.50 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $550.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $550.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $184.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $120.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $25.00 awarded to landlord; Walls and Doors: $941.00 awarded to landlord; Water Charges February 2025: $91.21 awarded to landlord; Water Charges March 2025: $169.74 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5282833?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5282833?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12564443-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5282833 about?

The tribunal order states: The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,280.00 (6527337-001) immediately

How much money was awarded in case 5282833?

Cleaning: $264.50 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $550.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $550.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $184.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $120.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $25.00 awarded to landlord; Walls and Doors: $941.00 awarded to landlord; Water Charges February 2025: $91.21 awarded to landlord; Water Charges March 2025: $169.74 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5282833?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5282833?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12564443-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

20 Tukauri Place, Papakura, Papakura 2110 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5282833 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5282833. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Water charges March 2025	$169.74	Water charges March 2025
Water charges February 2025	$91.21	Water charges February 2025
Repairs due to flooding (insurance excess	$550.00	Repairs due to flooding (insurance excess
Repairs to carpet (insurance excess	$550.00	Repairs to carpet (insurance excess
Repairs to walls and doors	$941.00	Repairs to walls and doors
Repairs to door seal	$184.00	Repairs to door seal
Repairs to blinds	$120.00	Repairs to blinds
Cleaning	$264.50	Cleaning
Repairs to hole in wardrobe	$25.00	Repairs to hole in wardrobe
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement

Both parties attended the hearing on 15 October 2025. The parties were requested to file documents and photographs referred to or shown on electronic devices. Neither party has done so. The parties therefore take the risk that the Tribunal would have made a different decision if its directions had been complied with.

The landlord has applied for loss of rent, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

The parties signed a residential tenancy agreement for a fixed term from 27 March 2024 to 26 March 2025. The weekly rent was $820.00. The tenancy was for the main house and a sleepout. Loss of Rent and Water Charges

The landlord claimed loss of rent for 4 weeks while repairs were performed. However, the tenancy ended when the fixed-term agreement expired. The landlord did not have new tenants waiting to move in. In my view, it has not been established that the premises would have been rented out prior to the end of the repair period.

The landlord claimed water charges for February and March 2025 ($91.21 and $262.04). The March invoice was affected by a leak. A credit of $77.44 was obtained from the water supplier and has been applied to the March invoice. The tenant submitted that this was insufficient, and previously their water bills had been no more than $100.00 per month. My review of the water charges does not support this, but I accept that the water charges were always much lower than the March 2025 invoice for $339.48. I allow 50% of the March bill ($169.74) and award the February charges ($91.21). Flooding

The landlord claimed the insurance excess of $1,000.00 caused by flooding to the kitchen and laundry. The tenant explained that the flooding was discovered on 16 March 2025. The pipe from the laundry tub to the washing machine had disconnected or burst. The tenant also said that when the gib in the wall behind the laundry tub was removed it revealed mould. The inference appeared to be that there had been a long-term problem with a leak, hidden in the wall. The landlord said the tenant did not notify the damage and by the time insurers were involved, about 10 days later, there was permanent water damage. Insurers performed repairs to the kitchen cabinets, kickboards, and gib-lining to the walls.

It seems that the tenants thought they had cleaned up after the flood and the landlord lost the opportunity to set up dehumidifiers. The tenants had an obligation to notify the landlord of any damage to the premises. It was careless not to do so. I find that the tenants are liable for the damage in the amount of the insurance excess.

Although the excess had increased to $1,000.00 when the insurance responded, the tenancy agreement notified an excess of $550.00. I consider the tenants were entitled to rely on this figure, which they said was not updated. That was the basis on which they agreed to rent the premises. I award $550.00 for damage caused by the flooding. Sleepout Carpet

The sleepout carpet was damaged by dog urine during the tenancy. The tenant did not dispute liability for this damage. The claim for carpet replacement was for $1,265.00. I consider the damage was caused carelessly. The tenant said he was looking after someone else’s dog for a short period. There is no basis to find the tenant intended to cause any damage. I award the insurance excess of $550.00. Painting Walls

The landlord claimed $782.00 for painting the walls to “touch up” damage and marks. The exit inspection report shows a range of small marks on the walls in various rooms. It is possible that the extent of the damage does not show up well in the exit report.

The property was built in 2021 and was therefore almost new when the tenancy started in March 2024. Although there are quite a few marks, I view most of these areas as fair wear and tear.

There is more serious damage to walls and skirting boards, probably caused by dog scratching or chewing. There is similar damage to two external doors (for which the landlord claimed $1,568.60). The tenant opposed the recoating cost for the aluminium doors and said they could be recoated for $800.00. It is difficult to assess compensation because some of the damage to the walls is minor. I award 50% of the painting claim for the damage to the walls ($391.00). I award the insurance excess for the scratching on the external doors, a total award of $941.00.

The tenant accepted liability for damage to a door-seal ($184.00) and to a blind ($120.00). These amounts are awarded. Cleaning

The landlord claimed $724.00 for cleaning. The cleaning cost included the kitchen, kitchen cabinets, the bathroom glass and vanities, and the silicone used in the shower. The landlord said the stove, rangehood and kitchen cabinets were greasy. The tenant said they were unable to remove the mould growth from the silicone sealant used in the shower and there was only a small black mark on the carpet.

The exit inspection photographs do not show obvious areas of cleaning although, as noted above, there were various marks on the walls. A tiled area in one of the bathrooms needed wiping down and the silicone between the tiles in the shower had some spots. If the shower had been cleaned regularly, I am unsure why the silicone could not have been kept in good condition. There is also a black mark visible on the carpet of bedroom 2. I award $230.00 plus GST for cleaning the shower and the black mark ($264.50). I decline to award the balance of the cleaning costs ($460.00). Kitchen Cabinet

The landlord claimed the cost of repairing a hole in a kitchen cabinet ($200.00). The tenants had drilled a small hole so they could run an electrical cord to the fridge. I view this as a very minor issue. The tenant ought to have obtained the landlord’s permission to make the hole, but it is unobtrusive. I award nominal damages of $25.00. Maximum Occupancy

The landlord claimed exemplary damages on the basis the maximum occupancy had been exceeded. The tenant said 4 people were living at the property initially, and later there were 5 people, including 3 tenants. The maximum occupancy specified in the tenancy agreement was 3 adults. The tenant said the landlord knew who was living there. The landlord acknowledged that she may have mistakenly agreed to the occupancy.

Whether or not the landlord knew what was happening, or gave consent by mistake, I am not satisfied that it would be just to award exemplary damages. This was a large property with 4 bedrooms and 3 bathrooms which could easily accommodate 4-5 people. The only significance is the increased wear and tear that the occupancy may have caused, and this has been taken into account. Filing Fee and Suppression

The outcome is an order to split the bond. The landlord has been more successful than the tenant. The filing fee is awarded to the landlord.

The landlord requested name suppression. The landlord has been partly successful but not all the claims succeeded. The claim for exemplary damages lacked merit. Suppression is declined.

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5282833. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Water charges March 2025	$169.74	Water charges March 2025
Water charges February 2025	$91.21	Water charges February 2025
Repairs due to flooding (insurance excess	$550.00	Repairs due to flooding (insurance excess
Repairs to carpet (insurance excess	$550.00	Repairs to carpet (insurance excess
Repairs to walls and doors	$941.00	Repairs to walls and doors
Repairs to door seal	$184.00	Repairs to door seal
Repairs to blinds	$120.00	Repairs to blinds
Cleaning	$264.50	Cleaning
Repairs to hole in wardrobe	$25.00	Repairs to hole in wardrobe
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement

The landlord has applied for loss of rent, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

The property was built in 2021 and was therefore almost new when the tenancy started in March 2024. Although there are quite a few marks, I view most of these areas as fair wear and tear.

The tenant accepted liability for damage to a door-seal ($184.00) and to a blind ($120.00). These amounts are awarded. Cleaning

The outcome is an order to split the bond. The landlord has been more successful than the tenant. The filing fee is awarded to the landlord.

The landlord requested name suppression. The landlord has been partly successful but not all the claims succeeded. The claim for exemplary damages lacked merit. Suppression is declined.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5282833 — Property damage at 20 Tukauri Place, Papakura, Papakura 2110

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5282833 — Property damage at 20 Tukauri Place, Papakura, Papakura 2110

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions