What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5319086?

The tribunal order states: The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,100.00 (3536154-006) immediately

How much money was awarded in case 5319086?

Property Damage: $750.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Futon: $400.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5319086?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5319086?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12636386-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5319086?

The tribunal order states: The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,100.00 (3536154-006) immediately

How much money was awarded in case 5319086?

Property Damage: $750.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Futon: $400.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5319086?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5319086?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12636386-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

65 Crescent Road East, Ostend, Waiheke Island 1081 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5319086 — Property damage

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5319086. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Replace futon	$400.00		Replace futon
Carpet in lounge (insurance excess	$750.00		Carpet in lounge (insurance excess

Order

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,100.00 (3536154-006) immediately apportioned as follows: Waiheke Property Co. Limited as Agent for Marie-Helene & Denis Ulcoq: $1,150.00 Natalia Barbieri: $950.00

Reasons

Both parties attended the videoconference hearing on 29 October 2025.
On 10 July 2025 the tenant applied for refund of the bond.
On 5 August 2025 the landlord applied for replacement of a futon/sofa bed ($1,490.00) the associated mattress ($1,140.00) and the insurance excess for carpet burns ($750.00). Background
The tenancy started on 25 June 2022 and ended on 27 June 2025. At the end of the tenancy the weekly rent was $750.00. A bond of $2,100.00 is held by the Bond Centre.
The landlord said the futon/sofa bed had been dismantled and the folding mechanisms taken off. The owner believes some of the parts are missing.
The landlord said the mattress had not been stored properly and had become mouldy, needing replacement. Photographs were provided that were said to show the mattress under the bed on two occasions in 2024 and 2025.
The landlord said the carpet had been damaged from sparks from the wood burner.
The tenant said the futon/sofa bed was not working properly and was at least 11 years old. So that it could be stored flat, the futon was disassembled. She asked friends who are builders, and they advised it would be easy to put back together.
The tenant said the room downstairs was a storage room which she did not use all the time (in written submissions she said it was used as a guest room; the landlord described it as a study). Without ventilation the room was humid. She did not usually store the mattress under the bed, but guests did so.
The tenant said some sparks flew out when she was setting the fire. She notified the landlord straightaway. She said the carpet was less than 50cm from the fire - which was too close. The wood burner had a door but no separate fire guard. The affected area of carpet was about 15cm x 15cm. Relevant Law
At the end of the tenancy, the tenant must leave all chattels provided for their benefit.
The tenant must not carelessly or intentionally damage the premises or permit any other person to damage the premises.
Before a landlord can recover compensation, they must prove that damage to the premises occurred during the tenancy that 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.
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. Analysis Futon
The futon was purchased on 29 October 2014 for $900.00. The evidence is not entirely clear about whether it can be re-assembled and what this might cost. The landlord mentioned that the futon was pre-assembled before shipping to the owner, as assembly was difficult. The landlord’s photographs appear to show that the futon frame had been converted into a permanent bed (i.e., non- folding).
The tenant was obligated to return all chattels provided for her benefit at the end of the tenancy. In my view this carries the implication that the chattels will be in working order. The sofa bed was not returned in this condition. The owner does not believe it can be reconstructed, and the fact the tenant asked for advice suggests that specialist skill may be required. Alternatively, I consider the tenant damaged the futon by disassembling it and leaving it in an unusable condition.
The purpose of compensation is to put the owner back in the position they would have been in if the futon had not been damaged or disassembled. The owner would have had a used futon, not a new product. However, it would have had continuing utility and some remaining value. The limited information available to the Tribunal indicates that a reasonable quality futon can be obtained for about $400.00. I award this amount to the landlord. Mattress
The mattress was purchased on 7 November 2014 for $1,400.00. It was therefore over a decade old.
Both parties agreed that the downstairs room needed to be ventilated. The landlord acknowledged it did not get a lot of sunlight. The tenant said she never saw the inside of the mattress during the tenancy, the implication being that she did not know it was getting mouldy.
I am not satisfied that the tenant carelessly or deliberately damaged the mattress. It probably became mouldy because it was stored in a room that was not used frequently. I do not consider the tenant acted carelessly in the way she stored the mattress or used the room. The tenant was entitled to make all reasonable use of the premises for residential purposes, including which rooms to use. The landlord bears the cost of damage or cleaning caused by the condition of the premises. Carpet damage
The photographs show a hearth surrounding the wood burner in a roughly hexagonal shape. There are about 6 burn holes on the carpet within a short distance of the hearth.
In my view, it is unlikely that this damage occurred on one occasion. I do not for a moment suggest the tenant intended to cause any damage. However, I consider it ought to have been possible for the tenant, using reasonable care, to avoid damaging the carpet to this extent. It is not the case that there was no fire-protection on the floor around the wood-burner, and there was a door allowing the fire to be enclosed. It has not been established that the hearth was inadequate or did not comply with building requirements.
I find the tenant liable to pay the insurance excess for the replacement carpet to the lounge. Filing Fee
Both parties have had some success. It is appropriate that they bear their own costs.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5319086. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Replace futon	$400.00		Replace futon
Carpet in lounge (insurance excess	$750.00		Carpet in lounge (insurance excess

Order

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,100.00 (3536154-006) immediately apportioned as follows: Waiheke Property Co. Limited as Agent for Marie-Helene & Denis Ulcoq: $1,150.00 Natalia Barbieri: $950.00

Reasons

Both parties attended the videoconference hearing on 29 October 2025.
On 10 July 2025 the tenant applied for refund of the bond.
On 5 August 2025 the landlord applied for replacement of a futon/sofa bed ($1,490.00) the associated mattress ($1,140.00) and the insurance excess for carpet burns ($750.00). Background
The tenancy started on 25 June 2022 and ended on 27 June 2025. At the end of the tenancy the weekly rent was $750.00. A bond of $2,100.00 is held by the Bond Centre.
The landlord said the futon/sofa bed had been dismantled and the folding mechanisms taken off. The owner believes some of the parts are missing.
The landlord said the mattress had not been stored properly and had become mouldy, needing replacement. Photographs were provided that were said to show the mattress under the bed on two occasions in 2024 and 2025.
The landlord said the carpet had been damaged from sparks from the wood burner.
The tenant said the futon/sofa bed was not working properly and was at least 11 years old. So that it could be stored flat, the futon was disassembled. She asked friends who are builders, and they advised it would be easy to put back together.
The tenant said the room downstairs was a storage room which she did not use all the time (in written submissions she said it was used as a guest room; the landlord described it as a study). Without ventilation the room was humid. She did not usually store the mattress under the bed, but guests did so.
The tenant said some sparks flew out when she was setting the fire. She notified the landlord straightaway. She said the carpet was less than 50cm from the fire - which was too close. The wood burner had a door but no separate fire guard. The affected area of carpet was about 15cm x 15cm. Relevant Law
At the end of the tenancy, the tenant must leave all chattels provided for their benefit.
The tenant must not carelessly or intentionally damage the premises or permit any other person to damage the premises.
Before a landlord can recover compensation, they must prove that damage to the premises occurred during the tenancy that 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.
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. Analysis Futon
The futon was purchased on 29 October 2014 for $900.00. The evidence is not entirely clear about whether it can be re-assembled and what this might cost. The landlord mentioned that the futon was pre-assembled before shipping to the owner, as assembly was difficult. The landlord’s photographs appear to show that the futon frame had been converted into a permanent bed (i.e., non- folding).
The tenant was obligated to return all chattels provided for her benefit at the end of the tenancy. In my view this carries the implication that the chattels will be in working order. The sofa bed was not returned in this condition. The owner does not believe it can be reconstructed, and the fact the tenant asked for advice suggests that specialist skill may be required. Alternatively, I consider the tenant damaged the futon by disassembling it and leaving it in an unusable condition.
The purpose of compensation is to put the owner back in the position they would have been in if the futon had not been damaged or disassembled. The owner would have had a used futon, not a new product. However, it would have had continuing utility and some remaining value. The limited information available to the Tribunal indicates that a reasonable quality futon can be obtained for about $400.00. I award this amount to the landlord. Mattress
The mattress was purchased on 7 November 2014 for $1,400.00. It was therefore over a decade old.
Both parties agreed that the downstairs room needed to be ventilated. The landlord acknowledged it did not get a lot of sunlight. The tenant said she never saw the inside of the mattress during the tenancy, the implication being that she did not know it was getting mouldy.
I am not satisfied that the tenant carelessly or deliberately damaged the mattress. It probably became mouldy because it was stored in a room that was not used frequently. I do not consider the tenant acted carelessly in the way she stored the mattress or used the room. The tenant was entitled to make all reasonable use of the premises for residential purposes, including which rooms to use. The landlord bears the cost of damage or cleaning caused by the condition of the premises. Carpet damage
The photographs show a hearth surrounding the wood burner in a roughly hexagonal shape. There are about 6 burn holes on the carpet within a short distance of the hearth.
In my view, it is unlikely that this damage occurred on one occasion. I do not for a moment suggest the tenant intended to cause any damage. However, I consider it ought to have been possible for the tenant, using reasonable care, to avoid damaging the carpet to this extent. It is not the case that there was no fire-protection on the floor around the wood-burner, and there was a door allowing the fire to be enclosed. It has not been established that the hearth was inadequate or did not comply with building requirements.
I find the tenant liable to pay the insurance excess for the replacement carpet to the lounge. Filing Fee
Both parties have had some success. It is appropriate that they bear their own costs.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5319086 — Property damage at 65 Crescent Road East, Ostend, Waiheke Island 1081

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5319086 — Property damage at 65 Crescent Road East, Ostend, Waiheke Island 1081

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions