Published tribunal order
Tenancy Tribunal case 5301501 — Property damage at 8B Aspen Place, Owhata, Rotorua 3010
Decided 25 Sept 2025 · Published 25 Sept 2025 · Application 5301501
- Property damage
Order
- [The tenant/s] to pay Linkpeople Limited $15,961.00 immediately, calculated as follows: DescriptionAmount Remove all rubbish inside & outside of property (includes storage room) 2,405.00 Ranchslider keys not returned302.00 Rekeyed back door entrance set with 2 keys116.00 Replace 5 lightbulbs35.00 Damage to premises Replace bathroom vanity225.00 Full house interior paint and wall repair3,650.00 Full house carpet and underlay3,450.00 Wardrobe shelves (partial allowance)200.00 Six internal doors and locks (partial allowance)1,200.00 DescriptionAmount Kitchen sliding door pelmet220.00 Blinds and thermal curtains1,140.00 Kitchen 3-drawer cabinet450.00 Wall socket fixing, window latch, security latches, light sockets
- 00 Floor damage in front of middle room175.00 Fence replacement (reduced)740.00 Deep cleaning650.00 Toilet seat replacement120.00 Filing fee28.00 Total Award15,961.00
Reasons
- The Landlord party attended the hearing.
- The Landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
- I would like the Landlord to set out its claims individually next time, on a per event basis, as opposed to lumped together in a single invoice. Each claim (e.g. hole in bedroom 1 door – photographs before and after, cost of repairs, including materials and labour, for each damage event) should be supported with before and after-tenancy photographs. The Landlord should set out its claims carefully, and in an organised manner. Many of the claims were not correctly described in the Landlord’s application (see para. 6 below).
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.
- I am satisfied, on the evidence provided, that the Tenant did not comply with these obligations. The premises required deep cleaning, rubbish removal, lock replacement, and a number of light bulbs had to be replaced. Not all keys were returned at the end of the tenancy. These costs were reasonably and necessarily incurred by the landlord.
- The amounts claimed under this head are proved, as follows: a. Remove all rubbish inside & outside of property - $2,405.00 (I have included rubbish removal from storage room, as the Landlord’s claim refers to inside and outside rubbish.) b. Ranchslider keys not returned - $302.00 [this was claimed on the Landlord’s application as, “keys as not all returned”.] c. Rekeyed back door entrance set, with 2 keys supplied - $116.00 [this was claimed on the Landlord’s application as, “change front lock”.] d. Replace 5 lightbulbs – $35.00
- 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.
- Where the damage is careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.
- Where the damage is caused carelessly, and is covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to the lesser of the insurance excess or four weeks' rent (or four weeks' market rent in the case of a tenant paying income- related rent). See section 49B(3)(a) RTA.
- Where the damage is careless and is not covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to four weeks' rent (or market rent). See section 49B(3)(b) RTA. Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. See section 49B(3A)(a) 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 was caused during the tenancy:
- The evidence establishes that the following damage occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear:
- The tenancy agreement began on 11 April 2022, with the ingoing inspection recording freshly painted walls, new carpet and vinyl, and new window coverings. By the end of the tenancy, many of these items required repair or replacement.
- The evidence establishes that the following damage occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear: a. Replace bathroom vanity - $225.00: The ingoing inspection recorded pre- existing swelling from water damage, but the cupboard required full removal and replacement at the end of the tenancy. This is more than fair wear and tear. The reduced claim of $225.00 is accepted. b. Full house interior paint and wall repair – $3,650.00: The ingoing inspection recorded freshly painted walls and ceilings. Significant repainting and plastering was required at the end. This is more than fair wear and tear. Claim allowed. c. Full house carpet and underlay – $3,450.00: The carpet was brand new at the start of tenancy. Full replacement was required at the end. This establishes damage. Claim allowed. d. Wardrobe shelves - $495.00: I award $200 based on pre-tenancy inspection report describing bedroom wardrobe shelves (3 bedrooms) as newly painted at the start of the tenancy. e. Corridor shelves – $495.00: No clear evidence links this to damage events during tenancy. The landlord must prove liability; without more, this is not established. Claim disallowed. f. Six internal doors and locks – $1,475.00: The doors were in good condition at the start. Repairs and locks required at end, although it is not unclear why there were six doors inside the home requiring internal locks and the invoice does not provide any clarity regarding how many locks were installed and where. The damage to the doors is more than fair wear and tear. I approve $1,200.00. g. Kitchen sliding door pelmet – $220.00: The pelmet was present at the start. Replacement was required at the end. This is more than fair wear and tear. Claim allowed. h. Blinds and thermal curtains – $1,140.00: The ingoing inspection confirmed new roller blinds. At the end, blinds had to be removed and replaced. The Landlord chose curtains as a cheaper option. This represents mitigation of loss. Claim allowed at $1,140.00. i. Kitchen 3-drawer cabinet – $450.00: No evidence in the ingoing inspection of pre-existing defect. Cabinet required replacement. Claim allowed. j. Wall socket fixing, window latch, security latches, light sockets (total $625.00)_ These fittings were new at the start. Repairs were required at the end. This is more than fair wear and tear. Claims allowed. k. Floor damage in front of middle room – $175.00: The vinyl/carpet was brand new. Invoice records floor repair. This is more than fair wear and tear. Claim allowed. l. Fence replacement – $740.00 (reduced): The ingoing report recorded broken trellis lining and storage area. Fence was not in perfect condition. The Landlord has halved the invoice. The reduced claim is reasonable. Claim allowed at $740.00. m. Deep cleaning – $650.00: Invoices show professional cleaning required. Tenant did not leave premises reasonably clean and tidy. Claim allowed. n. Toilet seat replacement – $120.00: Toilet and cistern were in good condition at the start. Replacement seat required. Claim allowed.
- On the evidence before me, the tenant has not disproved liability for this damage.
- 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.
- Because Linkpeople Limited has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee of $28.00.