How much money was awarded in case 5331522?

Cleaning: $655.75 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $400.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $828.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Remove Contaminated Furniture: $230.30 awarded to landlord; Replace Key And Swipe Card: $60.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Locks: $285.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Smashed Tv Screen (Depreciat…: $200.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5331522?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5331522?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13078657-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5331522?

Cleaning: $655.75 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $400.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $828.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Remove Contaminated Furniture: $230.30 awarded to landlord; Replace Key And Swipe Card: $60.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Locks: $285.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Smashed Tv Screen (Depreciat…: $200.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5331522?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5331522?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13078657-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit/Flat Unit 8B, 18 Scotia Place, Auckland Central, Tenancy Tribunal Case 5331522 — Property damage

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5331522 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

Tenantcheck Insights

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5331522 — net $1,227.05 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Remove contaminated furniture	$230.30	Remove contaminated furniture
Replace damaged queen bed, double bed, and bed frame (depreciated	$400.00	Replace damaged queen bed, double bed, and bed frame (depreciated
Replace smashed tv screen (depreciated	$200.00	Replace smashed tv screen (depreciated
Cleaning	$655.75	Cleaning
Repairs	$828.00	Repairs
Replace key and swipe card	$60.00	Replace key and swipe card
Compensation for damaged carpet (insurance excess	$500.00	Compensation for damaged carpet (insurance excess
Replace locks	$285.00	Replace locks
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,227.05
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,227.05

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.

Evelyn Gray must pay [The landlord/s] $1,227.05 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,960.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing I held on 3 February 2026.

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

The tenant’s application is a defence to the landlord’s application. She also seeks exemplary damages because she alleges that the landlord did not disclose insurance information in the tenancy agreement or provide a copy of the insurance policy. The tenant also appears to suggest that the landlord’s claim must fail, and all her rent must be refunded, because the tenancy agreement produced in evidence was not signed by her.

Did the tenant comply with her 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 1 .

The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy. The landlord’s photos and the invoice produced in evidence prove this claim.

The tenant accepts that furniture provided as part of the tenancy was contaminated. The furniture (a queen bed, a double bed, and a bed frame) had to be removed with other chattels left behind. The tenant believes that the body corporate would have removed the chattels free of charge. However, the landlord had to pay the removal cost, and the tenant is liable for that.

The tenant did not return all the keys. Some months after the tenancy ended, she tried to access the premises to check whether a key worked before she returned it. That caused distress to the new tenant who was home when she tried to enter. The landlord was justified in having the locks changed. The tenant is liable for that cost. 1 See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA)

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 2 .

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) 3 .

The landlord does not allege that the tenant caused intentional damage. Rather the landlord alleges that the damage was careless damage.

The tenant accepts that the beds were contaminated. She submitted that depreciation had to be considered. I agree. 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.

The landlord did not know the exact age of the chattels that were contaminated. I have considered the photos of the items. I have allowed the landlord compensation of $400.00 in total from a combined claim of $693.00 to properly take depreciation into account, based on my assessment of the photos produced in evidence.

A tv screen was smashed. The tenant accepts that the damage occurred but again submitted that depreciation must be considered. The tv screen is now obsolete. From the claim of $858.00 I have allowed compensation of $200.00 as the landlord did not know the age of the damaged chattel and realistically did not seek the total amount claimed. It is probable that the tv screen was an old chattel.

The carpet in the lounge and 2 bedrooms was so badly stained it had to be replaced. The tenant accepted that the damage occurred during the tenancy. She submitted she was not liable for the replacement cost because the premises were being renovated for sale.

The landlord said the premises were not being renovated for sale. Even if they were, that does not relieve the tenant of liability for the repair of damage, in this case the replacement of the carpet.

The tenant’s liability in this case is limited to $500.00 which is the excess on the body corporate insurance that covers the owner of the premises. 2 See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA 3 See section 49B(3)(a) RTA

The tenant caused damage to walls where a wall heater and the towel rail had been pulled off and 2 sliding doors had to be properly reattached and adjusted.

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

The amounts ordered are proved by invoices and photos. The tenant said the damage was accidental, but I find that it was careless damage for which she is liable. The tenant’s application

The tenant alleges that the landlord did not disclose insurance information in the tenancy agreement as required 4 .

The tenancy agreement does include the insurance information required to be disclosed.

The tenant said she did not receive a copy of the insurance policy, but she accepted that she did not ask for a copy.

The landlord has not committed any breach of disclosure requirements for insurance.

I adjourned the hearing until 5.00pm on Wednesday 4 February 2026 to allow the landlord the opportunity to provide a copy of the tenancy agreement signed by the tenant. The landlord’s representative advised the registry that the agreement appears to have been signed manually and not digitally and cannot be located within the system. Only the digital copy signed by the landlord, produced in evidence, can be located.

Nothing really turns on that. It is probable that the tenancy agreement was signed by both parties, the signed copy now misplaced. The tenant’s suggestion that the absence of the agreement signed by her means the landlord’s claim is void and all rent must therefore be refunded to her has no basis in law. The tenancy is evidence by the payment of rent between April 2022 and July 2025.

The tenant’s application is dismissed. Result

The bond will be paid to the landlord.

After the deduction of the bond, the tenant will pay the landlord $1,227.05 which includes reimbursement of the filing fee on the successful application.

The tenant’s application is dismissed. 4 a breach of section 13A(2) RTA Name suppression

The landlord sought, and is entitled to, name suppression as the application is successful. The tenant is not entitled to name suppression as her application is unsuccessful as is her defence to the landlord’s application 5 .

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5331522 — net $1,227.05 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Remove contaminated furniture	$230.30	Remove contaminated furniture
Replace damaged queen bed, double bed, and bed frame (depreciated	$400.00	Replace damaged queen bed, double bed, and bed frame (depreciated
Replace smashed tv screen (depreciated	$200.00	Replace smashed tv screen (depreciated
Cleaning	$655.75	Cleaning
Repairs	$828.00	Repairs
Replace key and swipe card	$60.00	Replace key and swipe card
Compensation for damaged carpet (insurance excess	$500.00	Compensation for damaged carpet (insurance excess
Replace locks	$285.00	Replace locks
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,227.05
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,227.05