Published tribunal order
Tenancy Tribunal case 5297943 — Property damage at Unit/Flat 3, 163 Bordesley Street, Phillipstown, Christchurch
Published 28 January 2026 · Application 5297943
Landlord favoured
- Property damage
- Cleanliness
Order
- Karah Lorraine Hoeta must pay Dilipkumar Gopalji Datta as agent for Sahil Datta $2,847.41 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:
Reasons
- Mr Datta attended the hearing representing his son, the owner of the premises and the landlord for this tenancy.
- The Tribunal has issued 3 previous orders. The bond has been fully refunded to the landlord, a portion to cover rent arrears (the first order) and the balance towards the costs awarded today.
- The landlord is insured. There is an excess of $500.00 on the policy. The landlord’s claims are limited to the amount of the insurance excess. I have marked the claims where the insurance excess limitation applies with *.
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 1 .
- The following damage was caused during the tenancy. There was a patch of lawn that was damaged and must be re-seeded. There was damage to the front door, the front door lock panel, the bench top, and to the vinyl downstairs. The carpet in bedrooms 1 and 2 was stained and must be replaced. A skylight was also damaged, but the repair cost is less than the insurance excess.
- The landlord also had to have the premises cleaned as the tenant did not leave them in a reasonably clean condition at the end of the tenancy.
- The amounts ordered are proved by an insurance scope report, an invoice and a quotation.
- The landlord’s agent claimed for his time and travel costs but those are not costs the Tribunal can award against the tenant. They can be claimed as business deductions.
- The landlord also claimed loss of rent compensation. The Tribunal only awards that kind of compensation is cases where the tenant has abandoned a fixed term tenancy or where the damage is so significant that the premises cannot be rented for a long period. Here, a new tenancy started 3 weeks after the landlord applied for a possession order after terminating the tenancy by notice. That is not an unusual delay between tenancies. 1 See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA)
- Nor can the landlord claim the difference in rent between this tenancy and the tenancy that followed. The landlord terminated the tenancy by notice and sought a possession order based on that. The decision to accept a new tenancy at a lower rent is not a breach of any statutory responsibility by the tenant.
- I have reimbursed the landlord the Tribunal filing fee as the application is successful.