What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5301558 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

How much money was awarded in case 5301558?

Cleaning: $120.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,055.00 awarded to landlord; Front Door/Lock/Frame: $450.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $65.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5301558?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage, Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5301558?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12578846-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5301558 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

How much money was awarded in case 5301558?

Cleaning: $120.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,055.00 awarded to landlord; Front Door/Lock/Frame: $450.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $65.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5301558?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage, Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5301558?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12578846-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5301558 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5301558 — net $1,418.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$2,055.00	Rent arrears
Repairs: Front door/lock/frame	$450.00	Repairs: Front door/lock/frame
Rubbish removal	$65.00	Rubbish removal
Cleaning: 4 hours (including oven	$120.00	Cleaning: 4 hours (including oven
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,418.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,418.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord name and identifying details.
Tyla Lauchlan must pay [The landlord/s] $1,418.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,300.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
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 29 July 2025. The landlord provided rent records prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy. This date includes a period of rent in-lieu of notice after the tenant left at short notice.

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 is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The tenant did not leave all of the the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish.
The landlord provided photos to support the claims. An invoice for $65.00 rubbish dumping was provided. This is awarded.
A quote for cleaning, including the oven, was provided. The actual cleaning was done by the landlord’s family. Having considered the required likely effort as evidenced and applying a $30p/hr rate I award $120.00 for cleaning.
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 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 front door was damaged beyond repair. The initial damage was caused during the tenancy by a person other than the tenant (but known to her) who was arrested at the time. A door panel was broken as well as the lock cavity. Further damaged was caused later by the tenant’s puppy making what seems to be a break for freedom through the gap. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant accepted liability for the damage, albeit the initial damage was not by her.
I must take 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.
The landlord claimed $895.14 as invoiced. This was supported by an invoice for that amount from one owner who is in trade. The consideration of betterment was explained at the hearing. The replacement door was $10.00, sourced second-hand. It was acknowledged the replaced door, after significant effort as invoiced, was better than before. I have balanced that with the necessary labour involved in repurposing the second-hand door obtained, as well as the additional need for repairs and modification to the door framing.
Having considered the invoice, submissions and evidence I award $450.00 for the replacement of the door, and associated labour for repair and installation. Filing fee
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. Suppression
Section 95A RTA states regarding suppression orders that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
The landlord requested suppression in its application. As it has been wholly successful, suppression is ordered.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5301558 — net $1,418.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$2,055.00	Rent arrears
Repairs: Front door/lock/frame	$450.00	Repairs: Front door/lock/frame
Rubbish removal	$65.00	Rubbish removal
Cleaning: 4 hours (including oven	$120.00	Cleaning: 4 hours (including oven
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,418.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,418.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord name and identifying details.
Tyla Lauchlan must pay [The landlord/s] $1,418.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,300.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
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 29 July 2025. The landlord provided rent records prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy. This date includes a period of rent in-lieu of notice after the tenant left at short notice.

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 is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The tenant did not leave all of the the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish.
The landlord provided photos to support the claims. An invoice for $65.00 rubbish dumping was provided. This is awarded.
A quote for cleaning, including the oven, was provided. The actual cleaning was done by the landlord’s family. Having considered the required likely effort as evidenced and applying a $30p/hr rate I award $120.00 for cleaning.
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 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 front door was damaged beyond repair. The initial damage was caused during the tenancy by a person other than the tenant (but known to her) who was arrested at the time. A door panel was broken as well as the lock cavity. Further damaged was caused later by the tenant’s puppy making what seems to be a break for freedom through the gap. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant accepted liability for the damage, albeit the initial damage was not by her.
I must take 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.
The landlord claimed $895.14 as invoiced. This was supported by an invoice for that amount from one owner who is in trade. The consideration of betterment was explained at the hearing. The replacement door was $10.00, sourced second-hand. It was acknowledged the replaced door, after significant effort as invoiced, was better than before. I have balanced that with the necessary labour involved in repurposing the second-hand door obtained, as well as the additional need for repairs and modification to the door framing.
Having considered the invoice, submissions and evidence I award $450.00 for the replacement of the door, and associated labour for repair and installation. Filing fee
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. Suppression
Section 95A RTA states regarding suppression orders that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
The landlord requested suppression in its application. As it has been wholly successful, suppression is ordered.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5301558 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5301558 — Rent arrears

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?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

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?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions