What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5316124 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 5316124?

Cleaning: $1,518.00 awarded to landlord; Electricity: From 19 October 2024: $904.32 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $8,224.38 awarded to landlord; Bathroom Sink Pipe And Trap: $245.81 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $117.95 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5316124?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5316124?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12588002-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5316124 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 5316124?

Cleaning: $1,518.00 awarded to landlord; Electricity: From 19 October 2024: $904.32 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $8,224.38 awarded to landlord; Bathroom Sink Pipe And Trap: $245.81 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $117.95 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5316124?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5316124?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12588002-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit/Flat 402, 70 Pitt Street, Auckland Central, Auckland Tenancy Tribunal Case 5316124 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5316124 — net $9,090.46 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears (to 8 April 2025	$8,224.38	Rent arrears (to 8 April 2025
Cleaning	$1,518.00	Cleaning
Repairs: bathroom sink pipe and trap	$245.81	Repairs: bathroom sink pipe and trap
Water rates: from 16 October 2024 to 8 April 2025	$117.95	Water rates: from 16 October 2024 to 8 April 2025
Electricity: from 19 October 2024 to 8 April 2025	$904.32	Electricity: from 19 October 2024 to 8 April 2025
Net award	$9,090.46
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$9,090.46

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
Mark O'Brien must pay [The landlord/s] $9,090.46 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,920.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

On 30 July 2025 the landlord filed an application with the Tribunal seeking rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The hearing proceeded by way of video conference. [Property Manager], Property Manager, appeared for the landlord. The tenant did not appear. Unsuccessful attempts were made to join the tenant to the hearing by telephone. The Tribunal was satisfied the tenant was properly served with the notice of hearing and the case proceeded in their absence. Background
The tenancy commenced on 19 March 2024 with the fixed term ending on 19 March 2025.
The tenant vacated the property on 8 April 2025. Relevant legal considerations
The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the “Act”).
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.
This obligation carried by the applicant is referred to as the “burden of proof.” Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
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.

How much is owed for rent, water rates and electricity charges?

The landlord provided up to date rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy totalled $8,224.38. The tenant last paid rent on 30 December 2024 and the records reflect the tenant’s ongoing failure to pay rent as and when it fell due. The amount claimed is awarded.
The landlord seeks water rates charges totalling $117.95 for the period 16 October 2024 to 8 April 2025. The landlord states the water rates invoices were e-mailed to the tenant, were for water use only and did not include fixed charges. The Tribunal was provided with copies of the Water Care Invoices and Tenancy Invoice. The amount claimed is awarded
The landlord seeks electricity charges totalling $904.32 for the period 19 October 2024 to 8 April 2025 and provided electricity bills and a tenant invoice for the amounts claimed. The amounts claimed is ordered.

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 landlord seeks cleaning and repair costs totalling $2,758.56 after paying a contractor to undertake remediation of the property at the end of the tenancy.
The landlord states the property was used as an Airbnb rental prior to the tenant moving in and was provided in a clean and tidy condition at the commencement of the tenancy, as required under the Act.
The landlord told the Tribunal the tenant failed to clean the property during the tenancy, which resulted in numerous conversations between the parties about the need for cleaning and ventilation, culminating in the tenant being served with a cleaning notice.
The landlord provided end of tenancy inspection photographs which showed the condition of the property at the end of the tenancy. The photographs showed the following cleanliness issues: i. Kitchen cupboards and doors were marked. ii. Mould and mildew build up on the tiled walls and seat in the bathroom. iii. The dishwasher was dirty. iv. The rangehood was greasy. v. The oven and microwave were dirty. vi. The toilet was heavily stained. vii. The floors had not been vacuumed or washed. viii. The ceilings, window joinery and walls were marked and mildewed. ix. The icebox in the fridge was heavily iced up.
The landlord states that the curtains throughout the property had to be laundered and rehung due to mildew. The landlord told the Tribunal that the balcony and balustrade had to be cleaned. Decision and Analysis
The Act does not require the premises to be returned in immaculate condition – only in a reasonably clean and tidy state. There is no scientific way to determine what is reasonably clean and tidy. What is required is for the Tribunal to evaluate the evidence available – particularly photographs presented, and then consider whether the premises would be reasonably clean. 1
After hearing from the landlord and considering all of the evidence the Tribunal is satisfied the tenant failed to leave the property in a reasonably clean and tidy condition at the end of the tenancy.
Based on the photographs available, the size of the property and the description of the work done, the tribunal awards the landlord $1,518.00 for the cleaning. That figure gives the landlord 24 hours of cleaning at $55.00 per hour + GST. I consider this to be sufficient time based on the photographs.
There is insufficient evidence to include compensation for laundering of the curtains.

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.
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) of the Act.
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 1 Bevan Realty Limited – As Agent for Xian Jian Chew v Kristian Pilgrim [2025] NZTT 5153354 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 landlord seeks compensation for damage to the fabric on the underside of the bed base, damage to the coffee table legs, damage to the sofa legs and unblocking and repairing the bathroom sink trap, they say was caused during the tenancy.
There is no evidence showing the condition of the bed base, coffee table or sofa at the commencement of the tenancy.
The landlord provided end of tenancy photographs showing: i. Rips in the fabric on the underside of the bed base. ii. One photograph of the top of the coffee table showing soiling under the glass panel. iii. One photograph of the sofa showing signs of watermarks. Analysis and Decision
Having heard from the landlord and considering all of the evidence the Tribunal cannot be satisfied that the damage to the bed base occurred during the tenancy.
Based on the evidence available the Tribunal cannot be satisfied that the coffee table legs and sofa legs were damaged by the tenant during the tenancy.
These claims are dismissed. Plumbing costs
The landlord seeks compensation after paying a contractor to repair the bathroom sink trap and waste pipe they say was damaged by the tenant during the tenancy.
The landlord states that the bathroom sink was functionally normally at the commencement of the tenancy, however, at the end of the tenancy it was so blocked it could not be cleared and had to be replaced. Analysis and Decision
Having heard from the landlord and considering all of the evidence the Tribunal is satisfied that the sink trap, and waste pipe were damage by the tenant during the tenancy and the damage is more than fair wear and tear. The Tribunal awards $245.81 compensation which includes $133.75 for parts, $80.00 labour and $32.06 GST. Costs
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. Name Suppression
The landlord seeks name suppression. Under section 95A of the Act a party who has been either wholly or substantially successful is entitled to name suppression unless the Tribunal finds that there are reasons relating to the conduct of the party not to do so. In this case the landlord has been substantially successful and is granted name suppression.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5316124 — net $9,090.46 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears (to 8 April 2025	$8,224.38	Rent arrears (to 8 April 2025
Cleaning	$1,518.00	Cleaning
Repairs: bathroom sink pipe and trap	$245.81	Repairs: bathroom sink pipe and trap
Water rates: from 16 October 2024 to 8 April 2025	$117.95	Water rates: from 16 October 2024 to 8 April 2025
Electricity: from 19 October 2024 to 8 April 2025	$904.32	Electricity: from 19 October 2024 to 8 April 2025
Net award	$9,090.46
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$9,090.46

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
Mark O'Brien must pay [The landlord/s] $9,090.46 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,920.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

On 30 July 2025 the landlord filed an application with the Tribunal seeking rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The hearing proceeded by way of video conference. [Property Manager], Property Manager, appeared for the landlord. The tenant did not appear. Unsuccessful attempts were made to join the tenant to the hearing by telephone. The Tribunal was satisfied the tenant was properly served with the notice of hearing and the case proceeded in their absence. Background
The tenancy commenced on 19 March 2024 with the fixed term ending on 19 March 2025.
The tenant vacated the property on 8 April 2025. Relevant legal considerations
The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the “Act”).
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.
This obligation carried by the applicant is referred to as the “burden of proof.” Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
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.

How much is owed for rent, water rates and electricity charges?

The landlord provided up to date rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy totalled $8,224.38. The tenant last paid rent on 30 December 2024 and the records reflect the tenant’s ongoing failure to pay rent as and when it fell due. The amount claimed is awarded.
The landlord seeks water rates charges totalling $117.95 for the period 16 October 2024 to 8 April 2025. The landlord states the water rates invoices were e-mailed to the tenant, were for water use only and did not include fixed charges. The Tribunal was provided with copies of the Water Care Invoices and Tenancy Invoice. The amount claimed is awarded
The landlord seeks electricity charges totalling $904.32 for the period 19 October 2024 to 8 April 2025 and provided electricity bills and a tenant invoice for the amounts claimed. The amounts claimed is ordered.

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 landlord seeks cleaning and repair costs totalling $2,758.56 after paying a contractor to undertake remediation of the property at the end of the tenancy.
The landlord states the property was used as an Airbnb rental prior to the tenant moving in and was provided in a clean and tidy condition at the commencement of the tenancy, as required under the Act.
The landlord told the Tribunal the tenant failed to clean the property during the tenancy, which resulted in numerous conversations between the parties about the need for cleaning and ventilation, culminating in the tenant being served with a cleaning notice.
The landlord provided end of tenancy inspection photographs which showed the condition of the property at the end of the tenancy. The photographs showed the following cleanliness issues: i. Kitchen cupboards and doors were marked. ii. Mould and mildew build up on the tiled walls and seat in the bathroom. iii. The dishwasher was dirty. iv. The rangehood was greasy. v. The oven and microwave were dirty. vi. The toilet was heavily stained. vii. The floors had not been vacuumed or washed. viii. The ceilings, window joinery and walls were marked and mildewed. ix. The icebox in the fridge was heavily iced up.
The landlord states that the curtains throughout the property had to be laundered and rehung due to mildew. The landlord told the Tribunal that the balcony and balustrade had to be cleaned. Decision and Analysis
The Act does not require the premises to be returned in immaculate condition – only in a reasonably clean and tidy state. There is no scientific way to determine what is reasonably clean and tidy. What is required is for the Tribunal to evaluate the evidence available – particularly photographs presented, and then consider whether the premises would be reasonably clean. 1
After hearing from the landlord and considering all of the evidence the Tribunal is satisfied the tenant failed to leave the property in a reasonably clean and tidy condition at the end of the tenancy.
Based on the photographs available, the size of the property and the description of the work done, the tribunal awards the landlord $1,518.00 for the cleaning. That figure gives the landlord 24 hours of cleaning at $55.00 per hour + GST. I consider this to be sufficient time based on the photographs.
There is insufficient evidence to include compensation for laundering of the curtains.

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.
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) of the Act.
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 1 Bevan Realty Limited – As Agent for Xian Jian Chew v Kristian Pilgrim [2025] NZTT 5153354 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 landlord seeks compensation for damage to the fabric on the underside of the bed base, damage to the coffee table legs, damage to the sofa legs and unblocking and repairing the bathroom sink trap, they say was caused during the tenancy.
There is no evidence showing the condition of the bed base, coffee table or sofa at the commencement of the tenancy.
The landlord provided end of tenancy photographs showing: i. Rips in the fabric on the underside of the bed base. ii. One photograph of the top of the coffee table showing soiling under the glass panel. iii. One photograph of the sofa showing signs of watermarks. Analysis and Decision
Having heard from the landlord and considering all of the evidence the Tribunal cannot be satisfied that the damage to the bed base occurred during the tenancy.
Based on the evidence available the Tribunal cannot be satisfied that the coffee table legs and sofa legs were damaged by the tenant during the tenancy.
These claims are dismissed. Plumbing costs
The landlord seeks compensation after paying a contractor to repair the bathroom sink trap and waste pipe they say was damaged by the tenant during the tenancy.
The landlord states that the bathroom sink was functionally normally at the commencement of the tenancy, however, at the end of the tenancy it was so blocked it could not be cleared and had to be replaced. Analysis and Decision
Having heard from the landlord and considering all of the evidence the Tribunal is satisfied that the sink trap, and waste pipe were damage by the tenant during the tenancy and the damage is more than fair wear and tear. The Tribunal awards $245.81 compensation which includes $133.75 for parts, $80.00 labour and $32.06 GST. Costs
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. Name Suppression
The landlord seeks name suppression. Under section 95A of the Act a party who has been either wholly or substantially successful is entitled to name suppression unless the Tribunal finds that there are reasons relating to the conduct of the party not to do so. In this case the landlord has been substantially successful and is granted name suppression.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5316124 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 402, 70 Pitt Street, Auckland Central, Auckland

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5316124 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 402, 70 Pitt Street, Auckland Central, Auckland

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent, water rates and electricity charges?

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, water rates and electricity charges?

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