Tenantcheck Insights · Case study
Tenancy Tribunal case 5290020 — Property damage at 25 Kayes Road, Pukekohe, Pukekohe 2120
Published 13 January 2026 · Application 5290020
- Property damage
- Cleanliness
At a glance
Key facts from the published tribunal order.
Outcome
Landlord favoured
From published order
Location
Pukekohe
Tribunal region
Adjudicator
J Tam
Dispute themes
Award balance
Gross awards, any bond applied per the order, and the remaining balance payable.
- Gross award
- $3,523.25
- Total balance for Tenant to pay Landlord
- $3,523.25
Claims & awards
What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.
| Claim | Landlord | Tenant | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Repairs: garage wall repainting | $310.50 | Repairs: garage wall repainting | |
| Cleaning: rubbish removal and tidying up of laundry and hot water cylinder area | $50.00 | Cleaning: rubbish removal and tidying up of laundry and hot water cylinder area | |
| Garage remote replacement | $115.00 | Garage remote replacement | |
| Replace furnishings: curtains | $200.00 | Replace furnishings: curtains | |
| Carpet Cleaning: spot clean | $275.00 | Carpet Cleaning: spot clean | |
| Repairs: hallway walls | $626.75 | Repairs: hallway walls | |
| Repairs: bathroom sink, less depreciation | $350.00 | Repairs: bathroom sink, less depreciation | |
| Repairs: kitchen switch cover replacement | $86.25 | Repairs: kitchen switch cover replacement | |
| Repairs: kitchen vinyl replacement, less depreciation | $400.00 | Repairs: kitchen vinyl replacement, less depreciation | |
| Repairs: kitchen top burnt marks repairs | $575.00 | Repairs: kitchen top burnt marks repairs | |
| Repairs: kitchen back door frame | $304.75 | Repairs: kitchen back door frame | |
| Rubbish removal: under the house items | $230.00 | Rubbish removal: under the house items | |
| Net award | $3,523.25 | ||
| Total payable by Tenant to Landlord | $3,523.25 |
Claims and awards for application 5290020 — net $3,523.25 NZD. Verify on MoJ.
Repairs: garage wall repainting
- Amount
- $310.50
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Repairs: garage wall repainting
Cleaning: rubbish removal and tidying up of laundry and hot water cylinder area
- Amount
- $50.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Cleaning: rubbish removal and tidying up of laundry and hot water cylinder area
Garage remote replacement
- Amount
- $115.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Garage remote replacement
Replace furnishings: curtains
- Amount
- $200.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Replace furnishings: curtains
Carpet Cleaning: spot clean
- Amount
- $275.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Carpet Cleaning: spot clean
Repairs: hallway walls
- Amount
- $626.75
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Repairs: hallway walls
Repairs: bathroom sink, less depreciation
- Amount
- $350.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Repairs: bathroom sink, less depreciation
Repairs: kitchen switch cover replacement
- Amount
- $86.25
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Repairs: kitchen switch cover replacement
Repairs: kitchen vinyl replacement, less depreciation
- Amount
- $400.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Repairs: kitchen vinyl replacement, less depreciation
Repairs: kitchen top burnt marks repairs
- Amount
- $575.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Repairs: kitchen top burnt marks repairs
Repairs: kitchen back door frame
- Amount
- $304.75
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Repairs: kitchen back door frame
Rubbish removal: under the house items
- Amount
- $230.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Rubbish removal: under the house items
Net award
Landlord $3,523.25
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord
Landlord $3,523.25
Claim types — money lines allowed on this order
Order
Monte Cecilia Housing Trust must pay Pro Edge Property Management Limited As Agent For Rajan Patel & Purvi Patel $3,523.25 immediately, calculated as shown in table below. Award table omitted. See the official MoJ PDF for line-item amounts.
Reasons
- Both parties attended the hearing on 24 November 2025 and 13 January 2026.
- The landlord has applied for compensation following the end of the tenancy.
- Here is a summary of my findings on the landlord’s claims.
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, 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.
- The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish.
- The landlord had to replace curtains and garage remote.
- Only the amounts ordered 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.
- 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.
- The following damage occurred during the tenancy: walls in hallway and garage, bathroom sink, kitchen switch cover, kitchen vinyl, kitchen top, and kitchen back door frame. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
- Only the amounts ordered are proved.
- I have taken into account 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 taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.
Topics & place
Topics are dispute themes across the order (not the same as claim-type money lines).
Residential Tenancies Act sections
s40(1), s40(2), s49B(1)
Key findings
- Dispute theme: property damage
- Dispute theme: cleaning
Property management
Frequently asked questions
Common questions about this Tenancy Tribunal case.
What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5290020?
The tribunal order states: Monte Cecilia Housing Trust must pay Pro Edge Property Management Limited
How much money was awarded in case 5290020?
Cleaning: $275.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $50.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $115.00 awarded to landlord; Bathroom Sink, Less Depreciation: $350.00 awarded to landlord; Garage Wall Repainting: $310.50 awarded to landlord; Hallway Walls: $626.75 awarded to landlord; Kitchen Back Door Frame: $304.75 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $86.25 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $575.00 awarded to landlord; Kitchen Vinyl: $400.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Curtains: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $230.00 awarded to landlord
What type of tenancy dispute was case 5290020?
The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness.
Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5290020?
The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12960119-Tribunal_Order.pdf.