What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5286222 about?

The tribunal order states: Gemma Elliot must pay Najib Property Management Limited $2,565.72

How much money was awarded in case 5286222?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $4,778.72 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5286222?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5286222?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12511558-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5286222 about?

The tribunal order states: Gemma Elliot must pay Najib Property Management Limited $2,565.72

How much money was awarded in case 5286222?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $4,778.72 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5286222?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5286222?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12511558-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

55 Rose Street, Somerfield, Christchurch 8024 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5286222 — Rent arrears

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5286222 — net $2,565.72 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears (to 6 June 2025	$4,778.72	Rent arrears (to 6 June 2025
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,565.72
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,565.72

Gemma Elliot must pay Najib Property Management Limited $2,565.72 immediately, calculated as shown in table below. DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears (to 6 June 2025)$4,778.72 Filing fee reimbursement$27.00 Total award$4,805.72 Bond$2,240.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$2,565.72

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,240.00 (5719897-002) to Najib Property Management Limited immediately.

The Landlord’s claims for vacated compensation are dismissed.

Reasons

A representative of the landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not attend.

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?

The tenancy ended on 6 June 2025. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.

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

The landlord claimed compensation for cleaning and repair costs of $5,480.62. It provided some invoices and receipts but no photographs from either the start or 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.

Where a landlord claims compensation for damage, they 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.

A party who brings a claim to the Tenancy Tribunal must prove on the balance of probabilities (more likely than not) that their version of events took place. They must prove that the other party has breached its obligations and the loss (or consequence) they have suffered because of that breach. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden of proof.

The issue of evidence at Tenancy Tribunal hearings was considered by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02. Judge Mather stated: “...[the applicant] needs to be reminded that like anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or a 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.” (emphasis added)

As noted above the landlord did not provide any photographs of the condition of the property at the end of the tenancy. The landlord did not establish that it is more likely than not that cleaning, or rubbish removal were required. The landlord claimed over $2,000 for labour it says was required to return the premises to a lettable condition but could not even state what that work was. In short, the landlord failed to discharge the onus of proving that it is more likely than not that the tenant breached its obligations. The claims for compensation are dismissed.

As the landlord was partially successful, I have awarded reimbursement of the Tribunal application fee. The landlord was not substantially successful, and if declined its request for suppression of its details.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5286222 — net $2,565.72 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears (to 6 June 2025	$4,778.72	Rent arrears (to 6 June 2025
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,565.72
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,565.72

Order

Gemma Elliot must pay Najib Property Management Limited $2,565.72 immediately, calculated as shown in table below. DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears (to 6 June 2025)$4,778.72 Filing fee reimbursement$27.00 Total award$4,805.72 Bond$2,240.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$2,565.72
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,240.00 (5719897-002) to Najib Property Management Limited immediately.
The Landlord’s claims for vacated compensation are dismissed.

Reasons

A representative of the landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not attend.
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?

The tenancy ended on 6 June 2025. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.

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

The landlord claimed compensation for cleaning and repair costs of $5,480.62. It provided some invoices and receipts but no photographs from either the start or 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.
Where a landlord claims compensation for damage, they 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.
A party who brings a claim to the Tenancy Tribunal must prove on the balance of probabilities (more likely than not) that their version of events took place. They must prove that the other party has breached its obligations and the loss (or consequence) they have suffered because of that breach. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden of proof.
The issue of evidence at Tenancy Tribunal hearings was considered by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02. Judge Mather stated: “...[the applicant] needs to be reminded that like anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or a 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.” (emphasis added)
As noted above the landlord did not provide any photographs of the condition of the property at the end of the tenancy. The landlord did not establish that it is more likely than not that cleaning, or rubbish removal were required. The landlord claimed over $2,000 for labour it says was required to return the premises to a lettable condition but could not even state what that work was. In short, the landlord failed to discharge the onus of proving that it is more likely than not that the tenant breached its obligations. The claims for compensation are dismissed.
As the landlord was partially successful, I have awarded reimbursement of the Tribunal application fee. The landlord was not substantially successful, and if declined its request for suppression of its details.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5286222 — Rent arrears at 55 Rose Street, Somerfield, Christchurch 8024

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5286222 — Rent arrears at 55 Rose Street, Somerfield, Christchurch 8024

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?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

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?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions