What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5313022 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 5313022?

Cleaning: $977.50 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $172.50 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $276.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $8,095.87 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $3,500.00 awarded to landlord; Painting: $2,875.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Recycle Bin: $101.65 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5313022?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5313022?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12480308-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5313022 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 5313022?

Cleaning: $977.50 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $172.50 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $276.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $8,095.87 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $3,500.00 awarded to landlord; Painting: $2,875.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Recycle Bin: $101.65 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5313022?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5313022?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12480308-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5313022 — Property damage

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5313022 — net $15,026.52 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears to 24 June 2025	$3,500.00		Rent arrears to 24 June 2025
Cleaning	$977.50		Cleaning
Cleaning: After tradespeople	$172.50		Cleaning: After tradespeople
Lawns and Garden work	$276.00		Lawns and Garden work
Repairs: Painting	$2,875.00		Repairs: Painting
sleepout kitchen repairs, fence repairs, rubbish and	$8,095.87		sleepout kitchen repairs, fence repairs, rubbish and
Replace recycle bin	$101.65		Replace recycle bin
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00		Filing fee reimbursement
Bond already with landlord		$1,000.00	Bond already with landlord
Total award	$16,026.52	$1,000.00
Net award	$15,026.52
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$15,026.52

The landlord attended the hearing together with the property owner. The tenant did not attend.

The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

The bond was not paid to the Bond Centre as required by the Residential Tenancies Act 1896 (the Act) and remained with the property owner throughout the tenancy. The bond has been credited to the tenant in this order.

How much is owed for rent?

The property owner contacted the tenant in March 2025 as rent was falling behind. The tenant made some payments towards rent following this but rent continued to fall behind into June.

The tenant emailed the owner, in response to his further communications, on 3 and 5 June to say that she had already left the property but was continuing to clear and clean as she could.

The owner has taken the date of the first email as the date from which the 21 days’ notice commences and the tenancy therefore ends on 24 June 2025 and rent is appropriately due to that date.

The landlord provided a rent summary to confirm the amount of rent owing, being $3500 to 24 June 2025.

The amount ordered is proved.

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) of the Act.

The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.

The property was left in a very untidy state. There were large amounts of tenant belongings left at the premises including multiple car parts and a large number of tyres.

Rubbish and various tenant items of limited or no value were left throughout the interior and exterior of the premises, including the sleepout.

The owner had tried to make arrangements with the tenant to collect some or all of the items, but the tenant had failed to comply with the arrangements.

The landlord provided invoices and photographs to support the cleaning and rubbish removal claims.

The tenant did not return the keys and the cost of replacement locks was included in the landlord claim itemised below ($200.00).

The Christchurch City Council recycle bin had been confiscated due to contamination by the tenant and had to be replaced at a cost of $101.65.

The initial cleaning invoice ($977.50) includes a full clean of the house and sleepout (two kitchens).

A further clean was required after the tradespeople had completed their work ($172.50).

The lawns and gardens needed attention and an initial invoice was provided for general weeding, lawn mowing and red bin empty ($276.00).

A single invoice totalling $8,354.62 included almost $3,000 for dumping costs. This included three full skips and a double axle trailer to remove car body and engine parts, about thirty tyres and other items left both in the house and around the property.

The invoice also included approximately $930.00 for cleaning considerable oil and other stains from a concrete driveway which the owner had installed approximately four years prior to the tenancy commencing. The stains were improved by an acid wash but were unable to be removed completely.

This invoice also included the supply and installation of weed mat and bark chips ($200.00) and the replacement of a shower curtain ($25.00). I have deducted $225.00 plus GST from the invoice as the shower curtain would have depreciated to nothing during the tenancy period (nearly four years) and I do not consider that this tenant should have to pay for new weed mat or bark.

The amounts ordered towards this invoice are proved as are the other amounts ordered above.

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 of the Act.

The following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. damage to a number of walls in three rooms which required repair and repainting ($2,875.00), b. The invoice referred to above (totalling $8,354.62) included repairs to the sleepout kitchen and flooring which the tenant had attempted to partially renovate without the landlord’s knowledge or consent (approximately $1,550.00). c. It also included damage to a boundary fence, due to car parts being leaned against it, which was repaired at a cost of $172.50.

The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

I have taken depreciation into account. The landlord has repaired the kitchen using less expensive materials to keep costs low for the tenant. I am awarding the full amount claimed in this case.

The fence was only about four years old at the beginning of this tenancy and the tenant’s behaviour has caused the damage. The amount claimed is minimal and I have awarded it in full.

The rooms were plastered and painted only a few years before the tenancy began and the owner had the full house repainted at his expenses following the end of this tenancy. He has only claimed for the most badly damaged rooms. In these circumstances I have also awarded the full amount of the painting claim.

The amounts ordered are proved.

As the landlord has been substantially successful, I have reimbursed the filing fee.

The landlord asked for suppression in the application, and as the applicant was substantially successful, I have ordered suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5313022 — net $15,026.52 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears to 24 June 2025	$3,500.00		Rent arrears to 24 June 2025
Cleaning	$977.50		Cleaning
Cleaning: After tradespeople	$172.50		Cleaning: After tradespeople
Lawns and Garden work	$276.00		Lawns and Garden work
Repairs: Painting	$2,875.00		Repairs: Painting
sleepout kitchen repairs, fence repairs, rubbish and	$8,095.87		sleepout kitchen repairs, fence repairs, rubbish and
Replace recycle bin	$101.65		Replace recycle bin
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00		Filing fee reimbursement
Bond already with landlord		$1,000.00	Bond already with landlord
Total award	$16,026.52	$1,000.00
Net award	$15,026.52
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$15,026.52

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
Ashley Elizabeth Phillipson must pay [The landlord/s] $15,026.52 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing together with the property owner. The tenant did not attend.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The bond was not paid to the Bond Centre as required by the Residential Tenancies Act 1896 (the Act) and remained with the property owner throughout the tenancy. The bond has been credited to the tenant in this order.

How much is owed for rent?

The property owner contacted the tenant in March 2025 as rent was falling behind. The tenant made some payments towards rent following this but rent continued to fall behind into June.
The tenant emailed the owner, in response to his further communications, on 3 and 5 June to say that she had already left the property but was continuing to clear and clean as she could.
The owner has taken the date of the first email as the date from which the 21 days’ notice commences and the tenancy therefore ends on 24 June 2025 and rent is appropriately due to that date.
The landlord provided a rent summary to confirm the amount of rent owing, being $3500 to 24 June 2025.
The amount ordered is proved.

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) of the Act.
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
The property was left in a very untidy state. There were large amounts of tenant belongings left at the premises including multiple car parts and a large number of tyres.
Rubbish and various tenant items of limited or no value were left throughout the interior and exterior of the premises, including the sleepout.
The owner had tried to make arrangements with the tenant to collect some or all of the items, but the tenant had failed to comply with the arrangements.
The landlord provided invoices and photographs to support the cleaning and rubbish removal claims.
The tenant did not return the keys and the cost of replacement locks was included in the landlord claim itemised below ($200.00).
The Christchurch City Council recycle bin had been confiscated due to contamination by the tenant and had to be replaced at a cost of $101.65.
The initial cleaning invoice ($977.50) includes a full clean of the house and sleepout (two kitchens).
A further clean was required after the tradespeople had completed their work ($172.50).
The lawns and gardens needed attention and an initial invoice was provided for general weeding, lawn mowing and red bin empty ($276.00).
A single invoice totalling $8,354.62 included almost $3,000 for dumping costs. This included three full skips and a double axle trailer to remove car body and engine parts, about thirty tyres and other items left both in the house and around the property.
The invoice also included approximately $930.00 for cleaning considerable oil and other stains from a concrete driveway which the owner had installed approximately four years prior to the tenancy commencing. The stains were improved by an acid wash but were unable to be removed completely.
This invoice also included the supply and installation of weed mat and bark chips ($200.00) and the replacement of a shower curtain ($25.00). I have deducted $225.00 plus GST from the invoice as the shower curtain would have depreciated to nothing during the tenancy period (nearly four years) and I do not consider that this tenant should have to pay for new weed mat or bark.
The amounts ordered towards this invoice are proved as are the other amounts ordered above.

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 of the Act.
The following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. damage to a number of walls in three rooms which required repair and repainting ($2,875.00), b. The invoice referred to above (totalling $8,354.62) included repairs to the sleepout kitchen and flooring which the tenant had attempted to partially renovate without the landlord’s knowledge or consent (approximately $1,550.00). c. It also included damage to a boundary fence, due to car parts being leaned against it, which was repaired at a cost of $172.50.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
I have taken depreciation into account. The landlord has repaired the kitchen using less expensive materials to keep costs low for the tenant. I am awarding the full amount claimed in this case.
The fence was only about four years old at the beginning of this tenancy and the tenant’s behaviour has caused the damage. The amount claimed is minimal and I have awarded it in full.
The rooms were plastered and painted only a few years before the tenancy began and the owner had the full house repainted at his expenses following the end of this tenancy. He has only claimed for the most badly damaged rooms. In these circumstances I have also awarded the full amount of the painting claim.
The amounts ordered are proved.
As the landlord has been substantially successful, I have reimbursed the filing fee.
The landlord asked for suppression in the application, and as the applicant was substantially successful, I have ordered suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5313022 — Property damage

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5313022 — Property damage

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