What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5309651 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 5309651?

Carpet: $800.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $1,168.00 awarded to landlord; Curtains: $600.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 5169757 D…: $1,080.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $994.29 awarded to landlord; Kitchen Cupboards: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Painting And Plastering: $6,000.00 awarded to landlord; Vanity And Toilet: $200.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5309651?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5309651?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12908391-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5309651 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 5309651?

Carpet: $800.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $1,168.00 awarded to landlord; Curtains: $600.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 5169757 D…: $1,080.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $994.29 awarded to landlord; Kitchen Cupboards: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Painting And Plastering: $6,000.00 awarded to landlord; Vanity And Toilet: $200.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5309651?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5309651?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12908391-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5309651 — Property damage

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5309651 — net $10,970.29 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears 25 April to 7 May	$994.29	Rent arrears 25 April to 7 May
Previous order application 5169757 dated 24/04/2025	$1,080.00	Previous order application 5169757 dated 24/04/2025
Cleaning: and carpet cleaning	$1,168.00	Cleaning: and carpet cleaning
Repairs: Painting and Plastering	$6,000.00	Repairs: Painting and Plastering
Carpet	$800.00	Carpet
Repairs: Vanity and toilet	$200.00	Repairs: Vanity and toilet
Repairs: Kitchen cupboards	$100.00	Repairs: Kitchen cupboards
Curtains	$600.00	Curtains
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$10,970.29
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$10,970.29

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landord’s name and identifying details.
Jody Grice and Tony- Rat Vaughan Te Moananui must pay the landlord $10,970.29 as calculated in the table below:

Reasons

The landlord attended the in-person hearing held today. The tenants did not attend.
The Tribunal was assisted by a mandarin interpreter.
The tenants lived at the 2-bedroom,1 bathroom property from 26 May 2023 to 6 May 2025. The property was brand new at the beginning of the tenancy.
The tenancy ended by way of a termination order of the Tribunal for rent arrears (see TT 5169757) on the 24 April 2025 but the tenants did not move out until the 6 May 2025.
The landlord claims that the tenants left the property dirty and extensively damaged.
The landlord seeks: a. Rent for the period 25 April 2025 to 6 May 2025 when the tenants had possession. b. Rent from 7 May to 27 June 2025. The landlord says that they could not relet the property until that date because of the condition that the tenant left the property in. c. Cleaning costs. d. Damage for: a. Broken vanity b. Carpet staining – which necessitates carpet replacement c. Damage to the kitchen cupboards and drawer, d. Cooktop e. Painting and plastering f. Light switches g. Toilet repair. h. Damage to a chewed pipe. i. Damaged windowsills and doors The burden of proof.
A party who brings a claim to the Tenancy Tribunal must prove on the balance of probabilities (more likely than not) that their version of events took place. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden of proof.
The issue of evidence at Tenancy Tribunal hearings was considered by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02. Judge Mather stated: “...[the applicant] needs to be reminded that like anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or a 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.” Rent.
The landlord claims that the tenants did not leave the property until the 6 May 2025.
The Tribunal has previously awarded rent arrears until the 24 April. The landlord has not enforced that order and has asked for that order to be incorporated in this order. I do so for enforcement purposes.
The landlord said that after the hearing, the tenants asked her if they could stay on at the tenancy until the 6 May, she agreed that they could do so and not pay rent from the 25 April 2025 to 6 May provided that they paid the full amount of rent ordered by the Tribunal. The landlord says that the tenants have not paid any rent awarded or rent from 25 April to 6 May and they therefore seek the total amount.
If a tenant remains in the property after the tenancy terminates then they remain liable for the rent arrears until they leave the property (s60 RTA).
The tenants are therefore liable for rent from 25 April to 6 May 2025 and I award that amount. Cleaning.
At the end of the tenancy, tenants must remove all their goods and leave the property reasonably clean and tidy and remove all rubbish.
The landlord provided photographs of the property taken at the end of the tenancy. They show a property that is very dirty. I am satisfied that the tenants did not leave the property clean and tidy and did not remove all their belongings.
The landlord says that it took two people to clean the walls, carpet and property. They have sought 22 hours per person @$23.50 per hour together with the costs of travel and the costs of hiring a carpet cleaner. I consider the hourly amount reasonable and the costs of hiring a carpet cleaner reasonable. I do not consider that the landlord should be reimbursed for travel, as the landlord could have got cleaners from the local area.
The amount ordered is proven. Damage. The relevant law.
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
Fair wear and tear is the decline in the condition of a property due to ordinary, everyday use.
The property was brand new at the start of the tenancy. The landlord had conducted inspections at the property and was dismayed to find that damage was occurring, she asked the tenant to repair the damage, and the tenant assured her that the damage would be repaired before they moved out. Sadly, that did not occur. When the landlord went to the property on the evening of the 6 May 2025 they found a property that had extensive damage, including numerous holes and gouges the walls, the window sills were scratched, the doors broken, plaster and paint repair work that was substandard, handles had been pulled off the vanity and kitchen cupboards, kitchen cupboards had been removed, there was children’s scribbling on the walls in the bedrooms, the cooktop was cracked and damaged, the bench top was chipped, the toilet was broken and the toilet roll holder was gone, there were cracked kitchen floor tiles and the wooden laminate flooring was chipped and the carpet in both bedrooms was extensively soiled and stained.
I am satisfied that the damage was more than fair wear. The tenant is liable for the damage.

What compensation should be awarded?

Compensation should restore a party to the position that they were in before the breach occurred. In this case the landlord had a brand new 2-bedroom property, that had been tenanted for two years.
Normally the Tribunal would assess what the loss is by looking at what the landlord had to pay a tradesperson to replace or repair items. However, in this case the landlord did all the repairs themselves, and they say that many of the items have not been properly repaired just enough to be able to re rent the property again. They say that without the tenants paying for the repairs they cannot afford to get the property remediated. They tell me that they have new tenants, whose tenancy commenced on the 27 June 2025 who are paying $600 per week including water (these tenants paid $580 per week including water), so there is no loss of rental value.
The landlords tell me that they were planning on selling the property but can’t do that now, as they are likely to suffer a significant loss due to the condition of the property. The landlord provided no evidence that supported this submission. 1 See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA.
When I enquired about insurance the landlord told me that they had not made an insurance claim as they are not insured for tenant damage.
The landlord has provided the Tribunal with the following quotes for the remediation work. • Painting and Plastering – from [Painting company] – whole house $9200.00 including GST. • Curtain replacement whole house- from [Curtain company] $3150 including GST. • Carpet replacement in two bedroom and repairs to the laminate flooring and tiles from [Flooring company] $1270.29 • Vanity, toilet roll holder, toilet seat repair and plumbing repairs – [Plumber] $1309.00 inclusive of GST. • Kitchen cabinet repair $100 from [Repairer].
The landlord has completed the following repairs themselves: a. Replacement curtains- the landlord says she brought second hand curtains for the whole house off Trade Me or Facebook Marketplace for $1800 cash. She did not provide a copy of the listing, or receipt of payment for the curtains. b. Kitchen cabinets- the landlord has reinstated the cupboard doors and fixed hinges. c. Vanity- the landlord says that she purchased a second-hand vanity off Trade Me or Marketplace, and paid cash, she cannot recall the exact amount but she thinks it is about $370.00 d. Plastering and some painting of the bedrooms e. Fixing the toilet.
A landlord who brings a claim to the Tribunal for damage has the obligation of proving the damage and the loss that has been suffered. The landlord has clearly proven damage, but the amount that should be awarded is a bit more difficult.
The Tribunal cannot simply award the amount quoted for in one quote, especially when the work that was done was not done by a qualified tradesperson. The Tribunal cannot also simply accept the oral testimony of the landlord as to what they paid for items, when it would be easy enough to provide the Tribunal with documents that corroborate the payment of those items such as receipts, bank transactions and screenshots of purchases. I also note that some of the quotes are for businesses that have no websites or physical addresses.
Despite all of the above deficiencies with the quotes and the landlord’s evidence, I am satisfied that the landlord has suffered some loss as a result of the tenant’s breaches. It would be inequitable for the tenant to avoid liability because the landlord repaired the items themselves or have not carried out the work because they cannot afford to.
I award the landlord the following: • Painting and plastering of walls $6000.00- the damage was extensive, and I consider that the landlord will need to repaint soon- this takes into account depreciation and betterment. • $800 towards carpet replacement- this takes into account depreciation and betterment. • $200 for the vanity and toilet repairs. • $100 for the kitchen cupboards • $600 for blinds and curtains- this takes into account depreciation and betterment.
This amount reflects the loss caused by the tenant’s damage. The nature and extent of the damage shown in the photographs supports the above awards as the damage was both extensive and pervasive.
This amount also taken into account the deficiencies which I have highlighted above in the landlord’s evidence.
The landlord has asked for rent until the 27 June. The landlord says that it was unable to re tenant the property due to the tenant damage. However, I was provided with no evidence that supported this proposition, such as advertisement listings. I also note that by seeking to do the work themselves the landlord took longer than tradespeople may have. Many of the quotes envisage that work could begin almost immediately. The landlord’s claim for rent from 7 May to 27 June is not proven and therefore dismissed.
The landlord also claimed the cost of repair for of a pipe that had been chewed by a rodent. The landlord says that the way that the tenants lived in the home probably caused mice. I am not satisfied that the tenant caused the mouse to eat through the pipe. Rats and mice occur naturally, unfortunately sometimes they come into properties and chew through pipes looking for water. This is an insurable event, not tenant damage. I therefore make no award for the chewed pipe. Filing Fee and Name Suppression.
The landlord has been successful in its claim. I award them name suppression as requested and the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5309651 — net $10,970.29 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears 25 April to 7 May	$994.29	Rent arrears 25 April to 7 May
Previous order application 5169757 dated 24/04/2025	$1,080.00	Previous order application 5169757 dated 24/04/2025
Cleaning: and carpet cleaning	$1,168.00	Cleaning: and carpet cleaning
Repairs: Painting and Plastering	$6,000.00	Repairs: Painting and Plastering
Carpet	$800.00	Carpet
Repairs: Vanity and toilet	$200.00	Repairs: Vanity and toilet
Repairs: Kitchen cupboards	$100.00	Repairs: Kitchen cupboards
Curtains	$600.00	Curtains
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$10,970.29
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$10,970.29

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landord’s name and identifying details.
Jody Grice and Tony- Rat Vaughan Te Moananui must pay the landlord $10,970.29 as calculated in the table below:

Reasons

The landlord attended the in-person hearing held today. The tenants did not attend.
The Tribunal was assisted by a mandarin interpreter.
The tenants lived at the 2-bedroom,1 bathroom property from 26 May 2023 to 6 May 2025. The property was brand new at the beginning of the tenancy.
The tenancy ended by way of a termination order of the Tribunal for rent arrears (see TT 5169757) on the 24 April 2025 but the tenants did not move out until the 6 May 2025.
The landlord claims that the tenants left the property dirty and extensively damaged.
The landlord seeks: a. Rent for the period 25 April 2025 to 6 May 2025 when the tenants had possession. b. Rent from 7 May to 27 June 2025. The landlord says that they could not relet the property until that date because of the condition that the tenant left the property in. c. Cleaning costs. d. Damage for: a. Broken vanity b. Carpet staining – which necessitates carpet replacement c. Damage to the kitchen cupboards and drawer, d. Cooktop e. Painting and plastering f. Light switches g. Toilet repair. h. Damage to a chewed pipe. i. Damaged windowsills and doors The burden of proof.
A party who brings a claim to the Tenancy Tribunal must prove on the balance of probabilities (more likely than not) that their version of events took place. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden of proof.
The issue of evidence at Tenancy Tribunal hearings was considered by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02. Judge Mather stated: “...[the applicant] needs to be reminded that like anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or a 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.” Rent.
The landlord claims that the tenants did not leave the property until the 6 May 2025.
The Tribunal has previously awarded rent arrears until the 24 April. The landlord has not enforced that order and has asked for that order to be incorporated in this order. I do so for enforcement purposes.
The landlord said that after the hearing, the tenants asked her if they could stay on at the tenancy until the 6 May, she agreed that they could do so and not pay rent from the 25 April 2025 to 6 May provided that they paid the full amount of rent ordered by the Tribunal. The landlord says that the tenants have not paid any rent awarded or rent from 25 April to 6 May and they therefore seek the total amount.
If a tenant remains in the property after the tenancy terminates then they remain liable for the rent arrears until they leave the property (s60 RTA).
The tenants are therefore liable for rent from 25 April to 6 May 2025 and I award that amount. Cleaning.
At the end of the tenancy, tenants must remove all their goods and leave the property reasonably clean and tidy and remove all rubbish.
The landlord provided photographs of the property taken at the end of the tenancy. They show a property that is very dirty. I am satisfied that the tenants did not leave the property clean and tidy and did not remove all their belongings.
The landlord says that it took two people to clean the walls, carpet and property. They have sought 22 hours per person @$23.50 per hour together with the costs of travel and the costs of hiring a carpet cleaner. I consider the hourly amount reasonable and the costs of hiring a carpet cleaner reasonable. I do not consider that the landlord should be reimbursed for travel, as the landlord could have got cleaners from the local area.
The amount ordered is proven. Damage. The relevant law.
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
Fair wear and tear is the decline in the condition of a property due to ordinary, everyday use.
The property was brand new at the start of the tenancy. The landlord had conducted inspections at the property and was dismayed to find that damage was occurring, she asked the tenant to repair the damage, and the tenant assured her that the damage would be repaired before they moved out. Sadly, that did not occur. When the landlord went to the property on the evening of the 6 May 2025 they found a property that had extensive damage, including numerous holes and gouges the walls, the window sills were scratched, the doors broken, plaster and paint repair work that was substandard, handles had been pulled off the vanity and kitchen cupboards, kitchen cupboards had been removed, there was children’s scribbling on the walls in the bedrooms, the cooktop was cracked and damaged, the bench top was chipped, the toilet was broken and the toilet roll holder was gone, there were cracked kitchen floor tiles and the wooden laminate flooring was chipped and the carpet in both bedrooms was extensively soiled and stained.
I am satisfied that the damage was more than fair wear. The tenant is liable for the damage.

What compensation should be awarded?

Compensation should restore a party to the position that they were in before the breach occurred. In this case the landlord had a brand new 2-bedroom property, that had been tenanted for two years.
Normally the Tribunal would assess what the loss is by looking at what the landlord had to pay a tradesperson to replace or repair items. However, in this case the landlord did all the repairs themselves, and they say that many of the items have not been properly repaired just enough to be able to re rent the property again. They say that without the tenants paying for the repairs they cannot afford to get the property remediated. They tell me that they have new tenants, whose tenancy commenced on the 27 June 2025 who are paying $600 per week including water (these tenants paid $580 per week including water), so there is no loss of rental value.
The landlords tell me that they were planning on selling the property but can’t do that now, as they are likely to suffer a significant loss due to the condition of the property. The landlord provided no evidence that supported this submission. 1 See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA.
When I enquired about insurance the landlord told me that they had not made an insurance claim as they are not insured for tenant damage.
The landlord has provided the Tribunal with the following quotes for the remediation work. • Painting and Plastering – from [Painting company] – whole house $9200.00 including GST. • Curtain replacement whole house- from [Curtain company] $3150 including GST. • Carpet replacement in two bedroom and repairs to the laminate flooring and tiles from [Flooring company] $1270.29 • Vanity, toilet roll holder, toilet seat repair and plumbing repairs – [Plumber] $1309.00 inclusive of GST. • Kitchen cabinet repair $100 from [Repairer].
The landlord has completed the following repairs themselves: a. Replacement curtains- the landlord says she brought second hand curtains for the whole house off Trade Me or Facebook Marketplace for $1800 cash. She did not provide a copy of the listing, or receipt of payment for the curtains. b. Kitchen cabinets- the landlord has reinstated the cupboard doors and fixed hinges. c. Vanity- the landlord says that she purchased a second-hand vanity off Trade Me or Marketplace, and paid cash, she cannot recall the exact amount but she thinks it is about $370.00 d. Plastering and some painting of the bedrooms e. Fixing the toilet.
A landlord who brings a claim to the Tribunal for damage has the obligation of proving the damage and the loss that has been suffered. The landlord has clearly proven damage, but the amount that should be awarded is a bit more difficult.
The Tribunal cannot simply award the amount quoted for in one quote, especially when the work that was done was not done by a qualified tradesperson. The Tribunal cannot also simply accept the oral testimony of the landlord as to what they paid for items, when it would be easy enough to provide the Tribunal with documents that corroborate the payment of those items such as receipts, bank transactions and screenshots of purchases. I also note that some of the quotes are for businesses that have no websites or physical addresses.
Despite all of the above deficiencies with the quotes and the landlord’s evidence, I am satisfied that the landlord has suffered some loss as a result of the tenant’s breaches. It would be inequitable for the tenant to avoid liability because the landlord repaired the items themselves or have not carried out the work because they cannot afford to.
I award the landlord the following: • Painting and plastering of walls $6000.00- the damage was extensive, and I consider that the landlord will need to repaint soon- this takes into account depreciation and betterment. • $800 towards carpet replacement- this takes into account depreciation and betterment. • $200 for the vanity and toilet repairs. • $100 for the kitchen cupboards • $600 for blinds and curtains- this takes into account depreciation and betterment.
This amount reflects the loss caused by the tenant’s damage. The nature and extent of the damage shown in the photographs supports the above awards as the damage was both extensive and pervasive.
This amount also taken into account the deficiencies which I have highlighted above in the landlord’s evidence.
The landlord has asked for rent until the 27 June. The landlord says that it was unable to re tenant the property due to the tenant damage. However, I was provided with no evidence that supported this proposition, such as advertisement listings. I also note that by seeking to do the work themselves the landlord took longer than tradespeople may have. Many of the quotes envisage that work could begin almost immediately. The landlord’s claim for rent from 7 May to 27 June is not proven and therefore dismissed.
The landlord also claimed the cost of repair for of a pipe that had been chewed by a rodent. The landlord says that the way that the tenants lived in the home probably caused mice. I am not satisfied that the tenant caused the mouse to eat through the pipe. Rats and mice occur naturally, unfortunately sometimes they come into properties and chew through pipes looking for water. This is an insurable event, not tenant damage. I therefore make no award for the chewed pipe. Filing Fee and Name Suppression.
The landlord has been successful in its claim. I award them name suppression as requested and the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5309651 — Property damage

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5309651 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

What compensation should be awarded?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

What compensation should be awarded?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions