What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5331480 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 5331480?

Cleaning: $685.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,219.90 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $339.25 awarded to landlord; Broken Glass: $1,754.07 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Carpet: $2,200.00 awarded to landlord; Walls and Doors: $2,254.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5331480?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5331480?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13071440-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5331480 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 5331480?

Cleaning: $685.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,219.90 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $339.25 awarded to landlord; Broken Glass: $1,754.07 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Carpet: $2,200.00 awarded to landlord; Walls and Doors: $2,254.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5331480?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5331480?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13071440-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5331480 — Property damage

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5331480 — net $8,480.22 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Repairs to walls and doors	$2,254.00	Repairs to walls and doors
Cleaning	$685.00	Cleaning
Lock/key replacement	$1,219.90	Lock/key replacement
Repairs to handles and locks	$339.25	Repairs to handles and locks
Replace furnishings: Carpet	$2,200.00	Replace furnishings: Carpet
Repairs: Broken glass	$1,754.07	Repairs: Broken glass
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$8,480.22
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$8,480.22

The landlord attended the video hearing. The tenants did not attend, and the hearing proceeded in their absence.

The landlord has applied for compensation (vacated damages) and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

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) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).

The landlord claims that the property required cleaning and has provided an entry and exit report in support of the claim, together with a cleaning invoice for $685.00. On review of the evidence, I am satisfied that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish and the amount ordered is proved.

The tenants also did not return the keys, and the landlord was required to change the locks at the invoiced cost of $1,219.90.

The amounts ordered are proved.

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 RTA.

Where the damage is careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.

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) RTA.

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 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 claims for damage to the walls and doors, the bedroom handles, the carpet and the glass doors and windows.

In particular, the landlord says that the living room sliding door and garage door glass was broken and had been temporarily covered by the tenant. Photographic evidence has been provided together with an invoice for repair of $1,754.07 and the amount ordered is proved.

The landlord says that there were holes in the walls, requiring patching and painting at a cost of $2,254.00. Evidence has been provided and the quote shows that it related to three bedroom walls. The landlord considers that this damage was likely intentional given the shape and size of the holes.

Additionally, the landlord says that the carpet was damaged throughout the property, including with significant staining throughout. They received advice that it was not able to be repaired or patched, and so were required to replace the carpet at the quoted cost of $3,507.50.

The evidence shows that the carpet was in a poor condition at the end of the tenancy, however, it was not new at the commencement of the tenancy. Accordingly, I have reduced the amount awarded for this to $2,200.00.

The following damage was caused during the tenancy: Carpet, glass doors/windows and walls. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The amounts ordered are proved.

I have considered betterment and depreciation. The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached their obligations and should not be better or worse off. In calculating depreciation, I have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.

There were other invoices included in the evidence provided, however, since these amounts were not included in the application form, I have not considered these further. The landlord is not prevented from filing a further claim in respect of these amounts.

Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have also reimbursed the filing fee. R Harvey-Lane 4 February 2026

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5331480 — net $8,480.22 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Repairs to walls and doors	$2,254.00	Repairs to walls and doors
Cleaning	$685.00	Cleaning
Lock/key replacement	$1,219.90	Lock/key replacement
Repairs to handles and locks	$339.25	Repairs to handles and locks
Replace furnishings: Carpet	$2,200.00	Replace furnishings: Carpet
Repairs: Broken glass	$1,754.07	Repairs: Broken glass
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$8,480.22
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$8,480.22

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
Vaine Tairi and Shilo Andrews must pay [The landlord/s] $8,480.22 immediately, as calculated in the table below:

Reasons

The landlord attended the video hearing. The tenants did not attend, and the hearing proceeded in their absence.
The landlord has applied for compensation (vacated damages) and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

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) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
The landlord claims that the property required cleaning and has provided an entry and exit report in support of the claim, together with a cleaning invoice for $685.00. On review of the evidence, I am satisfied that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish and the amount ordered is proved.
The tenants also did not return the keys, and the landlord was required to change the locks at the invoiced cost of $1,219.90.
The amounts ordered are proved.

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 RTA.
Where the damage is careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.
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) RTA.
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 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 claims for damage to the walls and doors, the bedroom handles, the carpet and the glass doors and windows.
In particular, the landlord says that the living room sliding door and garage door glass was broken and had been temporarily covered by the tenant. Photographic evidence has been provided together with an invoice for repair of $1,754.07 and the amount ordered is proved.
The landlord says that there were holes in the walls, requiring patching and painting at a cost of $2,254.00. Evidence has been provided and the quote shows that it related to three bedroom walls. The landlord considers that this damage was likely intentional given the shape and size of the holes.
Additionally, the landlord says that the carpet was damaged throughout the property, including with significant staining throughout. They received advice that it was not able to be repaired or patched, and so were required to replace the carpet at the quoted cost of $3,507.50.
The evidence shows that the carpet was in a poor condition at the end of the tenancy, however, it was not new at the commencement of the tenancy. Accordingly, I have reduced the amount awarded for this to $2,200.00.
The following damage was caused during the tenancy: Carpet, glass doors/windows and walls. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved.
I have considered betterment and depreciation. The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached their obligations and should not be better or worse off. In calculating depreciation, I have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.
There were other invoices included in the evidence provided, however, since these amounts were not included in the application form, I have not considered these further. The landlord is not prevented from filing a further claim in respect of these amounts.
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have also reimbursed the filing fee. R Harvey-Lane 4 February 2026

Tenancy Tribunal case 5331480 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5331480 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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