What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5295021 about?

The tribunal order states: Upon the landlord’s application, the Tribunal orders suppression of the

How much money was awarded in case 5295021?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $221.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $829.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $111.47 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5295021?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5295021?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12303951-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5295021 about?

The tribunal order states: Upon the landlord’s application, the Tribunal orders suppression of the

How much money was awarded in case 5295021?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $221.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $829.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $111.47 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5295021?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5295021?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12303951-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

20 Spencer Road, Pinehill, Auckland 0632 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5295021 — Property damage

Reasons

The landlord’s application

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5295021 — net $1,188.47 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rubbish removal	$829.00	Rubbish removal
Lock/key replacement	$221.00	Lock/key replacement
Water rates	$111.47	Water rates
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,188.47
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,188.47

On 7 April 2025, the Tribunal issued an earlier order in the landlord’s favour, granting termination of tenancy, rental and water arrears, refund of bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee, and name suppression.

In this hearing, the landlord seeks reimbursement of certain post-termination vacation costs that were not dealt with, and additional to, those at the earlier Tribunal hearing, reimbursement of the Tribunal’s filing fee, and name suppression. Should the Tribunal proceed in the tenant’s absence?

Only the landlord attended the hearing. The tenant could not be contacted and did not appear.

The Registry confirmed service of hearing notice via the tenant’s known email and phone, as listed in the tenancy agreement and previously used by the landlord.

No adjournment request or alternate attendance was received from the tenant.

The Tribunal was satisfied that the tenant was properly served, and the hearing proceeded in her absence.

Should the Tribunal order the amounts sought?

Rubbish removal - $829.00

Under section 40(1)(e)(iii) of the Act and clause 6 of the tenancy agreement, tenants must leave the premises reasonably clean and remove all rubbish upon termination.

The tenant failed to do so. The landlord’s invoice was accepted. Accordingly, the Tribunal accepted the landlord’s claim and orders compensation under sections 77(2)(n) and 78(1)(d) of the Act. Locksmith charges - $221.00

Section 40(1)(e)(iv) of the Act and clause 6 of the tenancy agreement require the tenant to return all keys at the end of tenancy. The tenant failed to return her keys. The landlord’s replacement costs were supported by an invoice. Accordingly, the Tribunal accepted the landlord’s claim and orders compensation under sections 77(2)(n) and 78(1)(d) of the Act. Water charges - $111.47

Under section 39(4)(c) of the Act and clause 6 of the agreement, the tenant is liable for water usage charges.

An outstanding amount remained at the end of the tenancy. The landlord’s invoice for volumetric water consumptions charges was accepted. Accordingly, the Tribunal accepted the landlord’s claim and orders compensation under sections 77(2)(k) and 78(1)(d) of the Act.

Should the Tribunal order other compensatory amounts sought by the landlord?

The landlord also claimed compensation of: a. $50.00 for damaged timber flooring, b. $50.00 for damaged entrance tile, and c. $150.00 for a damaged gas hose.

These claims lacked: a. Independent verification (e.g. quotes, receipts); and b. Photographic and/or other evidence of the property’s pre-tenancy condition.

After discussion of these issues with the landlord, these amounts claimed were not pursued further due to their relatively low value.

The Tribunal dismisses these claims accordingly. Filing fee

As the landlord at least partially succeeded, the Tribunal reimbursement of the filing fee is awarded under section 102(4)(b) of the Act.

Should the Tribunal order name suppression?

Under section 95A(1) of the Act, a wholly or substantially successful party is entitled to name suppression unless public interest justifies publication.

As the landlord substantially succeeded and there is no public interest overriding suppression, suppression is granted.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5295021 — net $1,188.47 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rubbish removal	$829.00	Rubbish removal
Lock/key replacement	$221.00	Lock/key replacement
Water rates	$111.47	Water rates
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,188.47
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,188.47

Order

Upon the landlord’s application, the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
Mychaela Ashley Anne Plant must pay [The landlord/s] $1,188.47 immediately, calculated as follows:

Reasons

The landlord’s application

On 7 April 2025, the Tribunal issued an earlier order in the landlord’s favour, granting termination of tenancy, rental and water arrears, refund of bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee, and name suppression.
In this hearing, the landlord seeks reimbursement of certain post-termination vacation costs that were not dealt with, and additional to, those at the earlier Tribunal hearing, reimbursement of the Tribunal’s filing fee, and name suppression. Should the Tribunal proceed in the tenant’s absence?
Only the landlord attended the hearing. The tenant could not be contacted and did not appear.
The Registry confirmed service of hearing notice via the tenant’s known email and phone, as listed in the tenancy agreement and previously used by the landlord.
No adjournment request or alternate attendance was received from the tenant.
The Tribunal was satisfied that the tenant was properly served, and the hearing proceeded in her absence.

Should the Tribunal order the amounts sought?

Rubbish removal - $829.00

Under section 40(1)(e)(iii) of the Act and clause 6 of the tenancy agreement, tenants must leave the premises reasonably clean and remove all rubbish upon termination.
The tenant failed to do so. The landlord’s invoice was accepted. Accordingly, the Tribunal accepted the landlord’s claim and orders compensation under sections 77(2)(n) and 78(1)(d) of the Act. Locksmith charges - $221.00
Section 40(1)(e)(iv) of the Act and clause 6 of the tenancy agreement require the tenant to return all keys at the end of tenancy. The tenant failed to return her keys. The landlord’s replacement costs were supported by an invoice. Accordingly, the Tribunal accepted the landlord’s claim and orders compensation under sections 77(2)(n) and 78(1)(d) of the Act. Water charges - $111.47
Under section 39(4)(c) of the Act and clause 6 of the agreement, the tenant is liable for water usage charges.
An outstanding amount remained at the end of the tenancy. The landlord’s invoice for volumetric water consumptions charges was accepted. Accordingly, the Tribunal accepted the landlord’s claim and orders compensation under sections 77(2)(k) and 78(1)(d) of the Act.

Should the Tribunal order other compensatory amounts sought by the landlord?

The landlord also claimed compensation of: a. $50.00 for damaged timber flooring, b. $50.00 for damaged entrance tile, and c. $150.00 for a damaged gas hose.
These claims lacked: a. Independent verification (e.g. quotes, receipts); and b. Photographic and/or other evidence of the property’s pre-tenancy condition.
After discussion of these issues with the landlord, these amounts claimed were not pursued further due to their relatively low value.
The Tribunal dismisses these claims accordingly. Filing fee
As the landlord at least partially succeeded, the Tribunal reimbursement of the filing fee is awarded under section 102(4)(b) of the Act.

Should the Tribunal order name suppression?

Under section 95A(1) of the Act, a wholly or substantially successful party is entitled to name suppression unless public interest justifies publication.
As the landlord substantially succeeded and there is no public interest overriding suppression, suppression is granted.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5295021 — Property damage at 20 Spencer Road, Pinehill, Auckland 0632

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5295021 — Property damage at 20 Spencer Road, Pinehill, Auckland 0632

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the Tribunal order the amounts sought?

Should the Tribunal order other compensatory amounts sought by the landlord?

Should the Tribunal order name suppression?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the Tribunal order the amounts sought?

Should the Tribunal order other compensatory amounts sought by the landlord?

Should the Tribunal order name suppression?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions