Tenantcheck Insights · Case study
Tenancy Tribunal case 5308722 — Cleanliness at 181 State Highway 16, Whenuapai, Auckland 0814
Published 4 May 2026 · Application 5308722
Landlord favoured
- Cleanliness
- Property damage
At a glance
Key facts from the published tribunal order.
Outcome
Landlord favoured
From published order
Location
Auckland
Tribunal region
Adjudicator
R Woodhouse
Dispute themes
Award balance
Gross awards, any bond applied per the order, and the remaining balance payable.
- Gross award
- $4,262.30
- Total balance for Tenant to pay Landlord
- $4,262.30
Claims & awards
What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.
| Claim | Landlord | Tenant | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Repairs | $1,840.00 | Repairs | |
| Cleaning | $2,394.30 | Cleaning | |
| Filing fee reimbursement | $28.00 | Filing fee reimbursement | |
| Net award | $4,262.30 | ||
| Total payable by Tenant to Landlord | $4,262.30 |
Claims and awards for application 5308722 — net $4,262.30 NZD. Verify on MoJ.
Repairs
- Amount
- $1,840.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Repairs
Cleaning
- Amount
- $2,394.30
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement
- Amount
- $28.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Filing fee reimbursement
Net award
Landlord $4,262.30
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord
Landlord $4,262.30
Claim types — money lines allowed on this order
Order
- Toni Elizabeth Watts must pay Sunshine Property Group Limited As Agent For Lup Go Yip $4,262.30 immediately, calculated as shown in table below. DescriptionLandlord Repairs$1,840.00 Cleaning$2,394.30 Filing fee reimbursement$28.00 Total award$4,262.30 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$4,262.30
Reasons
- The Tribunal must consider an application filed by the landlord against the tenant.
- Only the landlord appeared at the hearing today. I am satisfied that the tenant has been properly notified of the hearing, and therefore I will proceed to consider the claim in her absence.
BACKGROUND
- The tenancy agreement records that the landlord is Lup Go Yip, by way of a property manager, Sunshine Property Group Limited. The tenant is Toni Elizabeth Watts.
- The tenancy commenced on 2 February 2024.
- The landlord states that the tenant moved out without notice, leaving significant rubbish in the premises, the property damaged and unclean, and now seeks orders in relation to that.
- A hearing was initially scheduled for 16 December 2025, but adjourned because the property manager was overseas.
- The hearing was rescheduled to 4 May 2026.
- At the hearing today, the property manager was assisted by a Mandarin interpreter supplied by the Tribunal.
- I record that the property manager attended the hearing unprepared. She did not have the file or claim with her, and needed to search on her phone for details of the claim, and even then could not locate it. As I explained to the property manager, she must attend the hearing with the relevant material and be prepared to present her claims. We proceeded with the Tribunal, referring to documents on the Tribunal’s file.
RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS
- The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
- With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations.
- That includes a requirement that the party bringing the claim (the applicant), establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. The balance of probabilities means more likely than unlikely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely.
- It is the applicant that must prove their case. As noted by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: ... [L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.
ANALYSIS
- The landlord has claimed the following costs: a. Repairs - $1,840.00 b. Lawn mowing fee, carpet cleaning, rubbish removal - $2,394.30
- The photographs from the end of the tenancy show very dirty premises, with extensive rubbish and I accept some damage.
- The landlord has provided invoices, recording the following work was needed: a. Wall repairs b. Plumbing repairs c. Indoor wall hole repairs d. Indoor cleaning e. Extensive rubbish removal. f. Removal of rubbish including: i. couches ii. mattresses iii. bedframes iv. refrigerators v. washing machines vi. massage pool vii. wood. g. Cleaning h. Grass cutting i. Carpet cleaning
- I have no reason to believe that the claimed damage and cleaning was not from this tenant.
- At the end of the tenancy, the tenant must remove all rubbish and return the premises reasonably clean and tidy. I accept the tenant did not achieve that.
- If damage occurs at the premises during the tenancy, which is beyond fair wear and tear, the tenant must prove it was not careless or intentional. I accept that the premises were damaged, the tenant has not disproven liability for that damage.
- The landlord’s claims as set out above are established and ordered in full.
FILING FEE
- Because the applicant has been wholly successful in their application, I must award the filing paid to commence the proceeding in the Tribunal.
Topics & place
Topics are dispute themes across the order (not the same as claim-type money lines).
Residential Tenancies Act sections
s1, s10, s14
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 5308722?
The tribunal order states: Toni Elizabeth Watts must pay Sunshine Property Group Limited As Agent For
How much money was awarded in case 5308722?
Cleaning: $2,394.30 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,840.00 awarded to landlord
What type of tenancy dispute was case 5308722?
The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Property damage.
Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5308722?
The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13539695-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.