What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5311840 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of [The party] and [The party] at 74 Stredwick Drive,

How much money was awarded in case 5311840?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Power Inspector: $690.00 awarded to landlord; Power Reconnection: $175.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $287.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $16.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $650.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $249.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $424.50 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $8,390.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $2,760.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $104.25 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5311840?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5311840?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12577216-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5311840 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of [The party] and [The party] at 74 Stredwick Drive,

How much money was awarded in case 5311840?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Power Inspector: $690.00 awarded to landlord; Power Reconnection: $175.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $287.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $16.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $650.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $249.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $424.50 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $8,390.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $2,760.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $104.25 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5311840?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5311840?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12577216-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

74 Stredwick Drive, Torbay, Auckland 0630 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5311840 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

74 Stredwick Drive, Torbay, Auckland 0630 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5311840 — Rent arrears | TenantCheck

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5311840 — net $11,014.75 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears as at end of tenancy	$8,390.00	Rent arrears as at end of tenancy
Water rates	$104.25	Water rates
Lock/key replacement	$287.50	Lock/key replacement
Key replacement	$16.00	Key replacement
Rubbish removal	$2,760.00	Rubbish removal
Power reconnection	$175.00	Power reconnection
Power inspector	$690.00	Power inspector
Insurance excess	$650.00	Insurance excess
Dishwasher damage	$249.50	Dishwasher damage
Stove replacement	$424.50	Stove replacement
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$11,014.75
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$11,014.75

Claims and awards for application 5311840 — net $11,014.75 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears as at end of tenancy

Amount: $8,390.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears as at end of tenancy

Water rates

Amount: $104.25
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Water rates

Lock/key replacement

Amount: $287.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lock/key replacement

Key replacement

Amount: $16.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Key replacement

Rubbish removal

Amount: $2,760.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Filing Fee Property damage Rent arrears Rubbish Removal Water Rates

Order

The tenancy of [The party] and [The party] at 74 Stredwick Drive, Torbay, Auckland 0630 is terminated, and possession is granted to Seaside Property Management Limited As Agent For Jianan Zhang, immediately.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,760.00 (3552565-015) to Seaside Property Management Limited As Agent For Jianan Zhang immediately.
[The party] and [The party] must pay Seaside Property Management Limited As Agent For Jianan Zhang $11,014.75 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below: DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears as at end of tenancy$8,390.00 Water rates$104.25 Lock/key replacement$287.50 Key replacement$16.00 Rubbish removal$2,760.00 Power reconnection$175.00 Power inspector$690.00 Insurance excess$650.00 Dishwasher damage$249.50 Stove replacement$424.50 Filing fee reimbursement$28.00 Total award$13,774.75 Minus bond-$2,760.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$11,014.75

Reasons

The Tribunal must consider an application filed by the landlord. The landlord seeks various orders from the Tribunal, including an order terminating the tenancy, and ordering the payment of rent arrears and other assorted compensation and damages. The evidence is that the premises have been used as a cannabis grow house, and the claims largely arise from that.
Only the landlord appeared at the hearing. I am satisfied that the tenants have been properly notified of the hearing, and therefore I will proceed to consider the claim in their absence.

BACKGROUND

The tenancy commenced on 26 May 2021, initially as a one-year fixed-term tenancy. The agreement records the tenants as [The party] and [The party].
In or around July 2025, the police executed a search warrant at the premises.
On 21 July 2025, Detective Sergeant Corey Brown wrote to the landlords to advise of the search warrant execution, and that they had seized cannabis plants which had been growing in the premises, however the equipment including pots and soil remained on site. Police also noted that power to the premises had been disconnected.
The landlord attended the premises, and determined there was a range of damage that required repair, and other work required, which is the subject of this claim. The Tribunal has been provided with a range of photographs, which support that the tenants had been growing cannabis inside the dwelling. Plastic sheets had been laid on the floor, and other barriers put up presumably to block light or vision into the operation. The tenants had made changes to the premises, including the installation of ducting, and what appears to be the installation of electric lighting.
A claim was lodged with the insurer, which was accepted. The landlord now seeks orders for losses not covered by the insurance policy.
A hearing was convened in the North Shore on 17 October 2025. There was no appearance by the tenants at the hearing. I have no reason to believe that the tenants were not properly notified of the hearing, so I will consider the claim in their absence.

LANDLORDS CLAIMS

At the hearing, the landlord confirmed their claims are as follows: a. Termination of tenancy b. Rent arrears $8,390.00 c. Water charges $60.80 and $43.45 d. Key cutting $16.00 e. Door repair and lock replacement $287.50 f. Rubbish removal $2,760.00 g. Power inspector $690.00 h. Power reconnection cost $175.00 i. Insurance excess $650.00 j. Damage to dishwasher $499.00 k. Stove damage $849.00 l. Costs for property manager $300.00 m. Filing fee $28.00 n. Bond release.
In the application, the landlord also requested an order for the disposal of goods.

ANALYSIS

I have set out the claims above, and will proceed to consider those claims, but in doing so, will group them as relevant for the respective legal considerations for each claim. Claim 1 – Rent arrears and water rates
The tenants have not given notice ending the tenancy.
The landlord seeks rent arrears to the sum of $8,390.00, a rent ledger has been provided supporting this claim. I find that claim is established.
The landlord also seeks water rates to the sum of $104.25. That claim is also established and is ordered. Claim 2 – Termination of tenancy
The evidence is that the tenants are in rent arrears.
On 12 August 2025, the landlord issued a 14 day notice to the tenants to remedy the rent arrears. They failed to do so, no further payments were made.
An application for termination of the tenancy has been made under section 56 of the RTA, which would allow the Tribunal to order termination if a 14 day notice is not complied with. However, section 56(2) confirms that if an application for termination under section 56 is made, and at the time of determining the matter, an application could be made under section 55, then the Tribunal should consider the claim as if it were made under section 55.
Section 55 is a general termination provision, which confirms that the Tribunal shall order termination of the tenancy if the rent is more than 21 days in arrears. That is the case here, and therefore, the Tribunal orders termination of the tenancy under section 55. The termination is to apply from 21 October 2025. Claim 3 – Compensation claims
When damage occurs during a tenancy, the landlord must first prove that the damage is not fair wear and tear, and then the onus shifts to the tenant to prove the damage was not careless or intentional damage.
At the end of the tenancy, the tenant must return the premises to the landlord reasonably clean and tidy. That means all rubbish must be removed.
In this case, the landlord has made various compensation claims, which I will address as follows.
The evidence is that the door and lock was damaged during the tenancy, and costs were incurred in repairing the damage, and replacing the keys. That would not be fair wear and tear, as the tenant has not proven that the damage was not careless or intentional damage, I find the tenants are liable for the full cost of that repair.
I am satisfied that the tenants have left the premises in a state where significant rubbish was left on the premises. The landlord was right in having that rubbish removed; some of it related to the cannabis operation that the tenants appear to have been operating. This claim is ordered in full.
The evidence is that the power to the premises needed to be disconnected by the police. I assume that was on the basis that there were concerns around the lighting arrangements and the power supply to the lights. In my assessment, the tenants must be responsible for that, because the cost arose directly from the tenants’ breach that would be using the premises for an unlawful purpose.
The premises have been extensively damaged in the course of making changes for the cannabis operation. That occurred during the tenancy, and those changes would be intentional damage for the purpose of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA). The tenants are liable for the entire cost of the damage repairs when the damage is intentional, but in this case the landlord has only claimed the insurance excess. That is awarded in full.
I note for completeness that the landlord advised me at the hearing today, that there has been other damage discovered to the premises that would fall outside of the maximum available under the insurance policy. I indicated to the landlord that if there is further damage that could be considered in a further claim to the Tribunal, but I could not consider it today.
The landlord has also claimed compensation for the replacement of the dishwasher and stove. The photograph shows physical damage to the front of the dishwasher, and the landlord reports that the stove had been broken internally, and that the electrician had looked at that item. I accept this damage occurred during the tenancy, again the tenants have not proven that the damage is not careless or intentional. However, as I signalled to the landlord today, I must apply depreciation. The items are likely to be around the 5 to 6 year mark, and I could accept that they would be around halfway through their expected life cycle. For that reason, I will award 50% of the replacement cost.
Finally, the landlord has claimed $300 for the property manager’s time in preparing and presenting this case. Unfortunately, I cannot make that order, because the range of representation costs that the Tribunal can award, is limited in section 102, and I cannot see that any of the circumstances where costs could be ordered have been established. I therefore decline this claim. Claim 4 – Disposal of goods
The evidence is that the tenants have left extensive goods on the premises. The landlord has applied for an order approving the disposal of those goods. I am satisfied that the goods that have been left, as demonstrated in the photographs, have no saleable value, certainly when considered in relation to the cost of storage and sale of those goods. Therefore, I order that the landlord dispose of any goods left by the tenants, as the landlord sees fit. Claim 5 – Filing fee
The landlord has been mostly successful in the application; therefore I order that the filing fee reimbursed to the landlord. Claim 6 – Bond
The Tribunal’s records are that there is $2,760.00 of bond in the Bond Centre, that is to be released to the landlord immediately.
I note for completeness that the Tribunal will contact the Bond Centre to request the bond is released. The landlord does not need to do anything further with the bond.

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5311840 — net $11,014.75 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears as at end of tenancy	$8,390.00	Rent arrears as at end of tenancy
Water rates	$104.25	Water rates
Lock/key replacement	$287.50	Lock/key replacement
Key replacement	$16.00	Key replacement
Rubbish removal	$2,760.00	Rubbish removal
Power reconnection	$175.00	Power reconnection
Power inspector	$690.00	Power inspector
Insurance excess	$650.00	Insurance excess
Dishwasher damage	$249.50	Dishwasher damage
Stove replacement	$424.50	Stove replacement
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$11,014.75
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$11,014.75

Claims and awards for application 5311840 — net $11,014.75 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears as at end of tenancy

Amount: $8,390.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears as at end of tenancy

Water rates

Amount: $104.25
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Water rates

Lock/key replacement

Amount: $287.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lock/key replacement

Key replacement

Amount: $16.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Key replacement

Rubbish removal

Amount: $2,760.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Filing Fee Property damage Rent arrears Rubbish Removal Water Rates

Order

The tenancy of [The party] and [The party] at 74 Stredwick Drive, Torbay, Auckland 0630 is terminated, and possession is granted to Seaside Property Management Limited As Agent For Jianan Zhang, immediately.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,760.00 (3552565-015) to Seaside Property Management Limited As Agent For Jianan Zhang immediately.
[The party] and [The party] must pay Seaside Property Management Limited As Agent For Jianan Zhang $11,014.75 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below: DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears as at end of tenancy$8,390.00 Water rates$104.25 Lock/key replacement$287.50 Key replacement$16.00 Rubbish removal$2,760.00 Power reconnection$175.00 Power inspector$690.00 Insurance excess$650.00 Dishwasher damage$249.50 Stove replacement$424.50 Filing fee reimbursement$28.00 Total award$13,774.75 Minus bond-$2,760.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$11,014.75

Reasons

The Tribunal must consider an application filed by the landlord. The landlord seeks various orders from the Tribunal, including an order terminating the tenancy, and ordering the payment of rent arrears and other assorted compensation and damages. The evidence is that the premises have been used as a cannabis grow house, and the claims largely arise from that.
Only the landlord appeared at the hearing. I am satisfied that the tenants have been properly notified of the hearing, and therefore I will proceed to consider the claim in their absence.

BACKGROUND

The tenancy commenced on 26 May 2021, initially as a one-year fixed-term tenancy. The agreement records the tenants as [The party] and [The party].
In or around July 2025, the police executed a search warrant at the premises.
On 21 July 2025, Detective Sergeant Corey Brown wrote to the landlords to advise of the search warrant execution, and that they had seized cannabis plants which had been growing in the premises, however the equipment including pots and soil remained on site. Police also noted that power to the premises had been disconnected.
The landlord attended the premises, and determined there was a range of damage that required repair, and other work required, which is the subject of this claim. The Tribunal has been provided with a range of photographs, which support that the tenants had been growing cannabis inside the dwelling. Plastic sheets had been laid on the floor, and other barriers put up presumably to block light or vision into the operation. The tenants had made changes to the premises, including the installation of ducting, and what appears to be the installation of electric lighting.
A claim was lodged with the insurer, which was accepted. The landlord now seeks orders for losses not covered by the insurance policy.
A hearing was convened in the North Shore on 17 October 2025. There was no appearance by the tenants at the hearing. I have no reason to believe that the tenants were not properly notified of the hearing, so I will consider the claim in their absence.

LANDLORDS CLAIMS

At the hearing, the landlord confirmed their claims are as follows: a. Termination of tenancy b. Rent arrears $8,390.00 c. Water charges $60.80 and $43.45 d. Key cutting $16.00 e. Door repair and lock replacement $287.50 f. Rubbish removal $2,760.00 g. Power inspector $690.00 h. Power reconnection cost $175.00 i. Insurance excess $650.00 j. Damage to dishwasher $499.00 k. Stove damage $849.00 l. Costs for property manager $300.00 m. Filing fee $28.00 n. Bond release.
In the application, the landlord also requested an order for the disposal of goods.

ANALYSIS

I have set out the claims above, and will proceed to consider those claims, but in doing so, will group them as relevant for the respective legal considerations for each claim. Claim 1 – Rent arrears and water rates
The tenants have not given notice ending the tenancy.
The landlord seeks rent arrears to the sum of $8,390.00, a rent ledger has been provided supporting this claim. I find that claim is established.
The landlord also seeks water rates to the sum of $104.25. That claim is also established and is ordered. Claim 2 – Termination of tenancy
The evidence is that the tenants are in rent arrears.
On 12 August 2025, the landlord issued a 14 day notice to the tenants to remedy the rent arrears. They failed to do so, no further payments were made.
An application for termination of the tenancy has been made under section 56 of the RTA, which would allow the Tribunal to order termination if a 14 day notice is not complied with. However, section 56(2) confirms that if an application for termination under section 56 is made, and at the time of determining the matter, an application could be made under section 55, then the Tribunal should consider the claim as if it were made under section 55.
Section 55 is a general termination provision, which confirms that the Tribunal shall order termination of the tenancy if the rent is more than 21 days in arrears. That is the case here, and therefore, the Tribunal orders termination of the tenancy under section 55. The termination is to apply from 21 October 2025. Claim 3 – Compensation claims
When damage occurs during a tenancy, the landlord must first prove that the damage is not fair wear and tear, and then the onus shifts to the tenant to prove the damage was not careless or intentional damage.
At the end of the tenancy, the tenant must return the premises to the landlord reasonably clean and tidy. That means all rubbish must be removed.
In this case, the landlord has made various compensation claims, which I will address as follows.
The evidence is that the door and lock was damaged during the tenancy, and costs were incurred in repairing the damage, and replacing the keys. That would not be fair wear and tear, as the tenant has not proven that the damage was not careless or intentional damage, I find the tenants are liable for the full cost of that repair.
I am satisfied that the tenants have left the premises in a state where significant rubbish was left on the premises. The landlord was right in having that rubbish removed; some of it related to the cannabis operation that the tenants appear to have been operating. This claim is ordered in full.
The evidence is that the power to the premises needed to be disconnected by the police. I assume that was on the basis that there were concerns around the lighting arrangements and the power supply to the lights. In my assessment, the tenants must be responsible for that, because the cost arose directly from the tenants’ breach that would be using the premises for an unlawful purpose.
The premises have been extensively damaged in the course of making changes for the cannabis operation. That occurred during the tenancy, and those changes would be intentional damage for the purpose of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA). The tenants are liable for the entire cost of the damage repairs when the damage is intentional, but in this case the landlord has only claimed the insurance excess. That is awarded in full.
I note for completeness that the landlord advised me at the hearing today, that there has been other damage discovered to the premises that would fall outside of the maximum available under the insurance policy. I indicated to the landlord that if there is further damage that could be considered in a further claim to the Tribunal, but I could not consider it today.
The landlord has also claimed compensation for the replacement of the dishwasher and stove. The photograph shows physical damage to the front of the dishwasher, and the landlord reports that the stove had been broken internally, and that the electrician had looked at that item. I accept this damage occurred during the tenancy, again the tenants have not proven that the damage is not careless or intentional. However, as I signalled to the landlord today, I must apply depreciation. The items are likely to be around the 5 to 6 year mark, and I could accept that they would be around halfway through their expected life cycle. For that reason, I will award 50% of the replacement cost.
Finally, the landlord has claimed $300 for the property manager’s time in preparing and presenting this case. Unfortunately, I cannot make that order, because the range of representation costs that the Tribunal can award, is limited in section 102, and I cannot see that any of the circumstances where costs could be ordered have been established. I therefore decline this claim. Claim 4 – Disposal of goods
The evidence is that the tenants have left extensive goods on the premises. The landlord has applied for an order approving the disposal of those goods. I am satisfied that the goods that have been left, as demonstrated in the photographs, have no saleable value, certainly when considered in relation to the cost of storage and sale of those goods. Therefore, I order that the landlord dispose of any goods left by the tenants, as the landlord sees fit. Claim 5 – Filing fee
The landlord has been mostly successful in the application; therefore I order that the filing fee reimbursed to the landlord. Claim 6 – Bond
The Tribunal’s records are that there is $2,760.00 of bond in the Bond Centre, that is to be released to the landlord immediately.
I note for completeness that the Tribunal will contact the Bond Centre to request the bond is released. The landlord does not need to do anything further with the bond.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5311840 — Rent arrears at 74 Stredwick Drive, Torbay, Auckland 0630

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5311840 — Rent arrears at 74 Stredwick Drive, Torbay, Auckland 0630

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

BACKGROUND

LANDLORDS CLAIMS

ANALYSIS

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

BACKGROUND

LANDLORDS CLAIMS

ANALYSIS

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions