What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5332900 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] must pay Inspire Property Management Limited (as agent for G

How much money was awarded in case 5332900?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $4,474.25 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 5254900 D…: $2,836.42 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,623.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,581.25 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $600.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Carpet: $1,075.25 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $719.18 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5332900?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5332900?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13241963-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5332900 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] must pay Inspire Property Management Limited (as agent for G

How much money was awarded in case 5332900?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $4,474.25 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 5254900 D…: $2,836.42 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,623.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,581.25 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $600.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Carpet: $1,075.25 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $719.18 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5332900?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5332900?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13241963-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

63 Parore Street, Dargaville 0310 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5332900 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Background

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5332900 — net $12,937.35 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears 28 June to 7 July 2025	$600.00	Rent arrears 28 June to 7 July 2025
Previous order application 5254900 dated 23/06/2025	$2,836.42	Previous order application 5254900 dated 23/06/2025
Water rates	$719.18	Water rates
Window repairs	$1,623.00	Window repairs
Replace carpet	$1,075.25	Replace carpet
Painting and minor repairs	$1,581.25	Painting and minor repairs
Cleaning, rubbish removal, lawns and gardens	$4,474.25	Cleaning, rubbish removal, lawns and gardens
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	57. This part of the claim is proven.
Net award	$12,937.35
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$12,937.35

The tenancy began in February 2019.

On 23 June 2025, the Tenancy Tribunal made an order terminating the tenancy on 27 June 2025, and awarding rent arrears and the filing fee to the landlord. 1 The bond was released to the landlord in that order.

This application seeks further rent arrears, water rates, repairs, replacement of carpet, cleaning, and rubbish removal costs.

The hearing took place in Whangarei on 6 March 2026. Ms Kehoe represented the landlord at the hearing. There was no appearance by the tenant. Notice of the claim and the hearing were served on the tenant in accordance with the requirements of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The hearing proceeded in the tenant’s absence. 2 Rent arrears

The previous order awarded rent arrears up to 27 June, the date of termination.

The tenant remained in occupation after 27 June, and was evicted on 7 July.

If a tenant remains in the premises after termination, they continue to be liable for rent. 3

I have brought forward the previous order into this one. Ms Kehoe confirmed that the landlord did not commence enforcement of the previous order.

Further rent arrears of $600.00 are owed for the 10-day period from 28 June to 7 July. Water rates

The Kaipara District Council invoice for the period from 12 November 2024 to 12 May 2025 remains outstanding in full.

Further water rates are owed for the period from 13 May to 7 July per the final meter read.

The claim is proven. Windows

There were broken windows in all four bedrooms and in the kitchen.

The damage is shown in the landlord’s final inspection report. 1 Inspire Property Management Ltd v Maxwell [2025] NZTT 5254900 2 Section 93 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”) 3 Section 60 RTA

In any claim for damage, the landlord must prove that the damage occurred during the tenancy and that the damage is beyond fair wear and tear.

If the landlord meets that burden of proof then the tenant will be liable for the damage unless the tenant can prove that the damage was caused by something other than a careless action by themselves or by anyone who was at the premises with their consent.

In this instance, the evidence shows that the damage occurred during the tenancy. The damage is not fair wear and tear.

Ms Maxwell did not participate in the proceedings and so has not proven that the damage was caused by something other than a careless or intentional action.

Therefore, Ms Maxwell is liable for the damage.

The cost of re-glazing is proven. Carpet

The only carpet in the house is in bedroom 2. The rest of the house has hardwood floors.

Ms Kehoe’s end of tenancy photographs show that the carpet is very badly stained.

I have no information about the age of the carpet, and very little information about its condition at the beginning of the tenancy. Ms Kehoe provided inspection reports from 2020, and the carpet is partially visible in those reports. Most of the carpet is obscured by the tenant’s furniture and rugs. The parts of the carpet that are visible in those reports seem to be in clean and tidy condition.

I am satisfied that the condition of the carpet at the end of the tenancy was such that replacement is justified. The carpet was heavily stained.

There is sufficient evidence to show that staining occurred during Ms Maxwell’s tenancy. The visible parts of the carpet in the 2020 inspections are not stained. The same areas are obviously stained in the end of tenancy report.

Depreciation must apply to the new replacement cost claimed. I have no information about the age of the carpet.

On the limited information available to me, having regard to the fact that the carpet was at least six years old at the end of the tenancy but could be significantly older, but was (at least in part) in good condition as at 2020, I will apply depreciation of 50% to the new replacement cost claimed by the landlord. Painting

The claim seeks the cost of painting and minor repairs per an invoice from See Sharp Painters. The work was: Repair and paint fireplace feature wall Remove handprints from bedroom door Prep and paint walls in 3 bedrooms Paint out handprints on side of house facing driveway

The end of tenancy report shows: Marks and damage on the feature wall including a hole. A dark paint handprint on a wooden bedroom door Marks, gouges, scratches, dents, and pinholes on the walls in the bedrooms.

The handprints on the outside of the house are not shown in the end of tenancy report. Ms Kehoe said that she did not notice the handprints, but her painted spotted them and sent her a photo.

Although I do not have a photograph of the exterior handprints, I accept Ms Kehoe’s oral evidence on this.

The photographs show damage to the paintwork beyond fair wear and tear during this tenancy. I accept that the nature and extent of the damage necessitated re-painting of the bedroom walls and feature wall. The door had to be sanded to remove the handprints, and the exterior wall had to be touched up to remove the handprints there.

The cost of this work was $6,325.00.

Depreciation must apply to the painting work.

The age of the paint is not known, but this tenancy began in February 2019 and there is no evidence that the premises were re-painted during the tenancy. Therefore the paint was at least six years old at the end of the tenancy.

Landlords must expect to periodically re-paint the interior due to normal wear and tear.

I will apply depreciation of 75% to the new painting cost claimed. Wood burner repairs

The claim seeks $1,784.44 for repairs to the woodburner.

In support of the claim, Ms Kehoe provided an inspection report from Flaming Fires dated 26 January 2022 and an inspection and sweep report from Kelly Sweeps Ltd dated 29 July 2025.

The Flaming Fires report notes that the burner was in “safe working order” with no issues.

The Kelly Sweeps report identifies several defects and concludes “do not use the fire until it has been repaired. The fire is unsafe for use”.

One of the defects in the Kelly Sweeps report is: “The door ropes and retainer are covered in plastic. This indicates the fire has been used to burn plastic and rubbish material”.

The report comments further on this: “Please note that the fire has had plastic and rubbish burnt in it. The fire is not designed to nor should it ever have plastic or fubbish burnt inside as this can cause damages to the fire system and will produce foul smelling toxic smoke”.

The landlord seeks the cost of repairs from the tenant on the basis of that damage.

However, the Kelly Sweeps report notes other damage: The mantel is missing and needs to be reinstated The baffle plate and bricks need replacing The airtubes need replacing The door handle is missing its spacer

None of this damage appears to be tenant damage, or at least there is no evidence that it is tenant damage.

The damage associated with burning plastic is the burnt plastic debris on the door ropes and retainer. The report states that burning plastic “can cause damage to the fire system” but there is no evidence of that damage in this instance.

The proven damage associated with the tenant’s careless action of burning plastic in the woodburner does not justify the repair work in the Plumbing & Heating Centre invoice, which includes replacement of bricks, baffles, air tubes and seals. Only part of that work pertained to replacement of the retainer, and I am not able to isolate that cost on the information available to me.

Therefore, this part of the claim is dismissed. Cleaning and rubbish removal

Tenants must remove all rubbish and leave the premises (including lawns and gardens) reasonably clean and tidy at the end of the tenancy. 4

The end of tenancy inspection report shows that Ms Maxwell fell well short of this standard.

There was a large amount of rubbish left inside and outside the house. Two 9m3 skip bins were necessary to dispose of it all.

The premises were not clean and tidy.

The lawns and gardens were overgrown.

The costs claimed include 2 x skip bins, labour for cleaning and rubbish removal, and garden / lawns tidy up work.

The costs claimed are substantial, but having regard to the end of tenancy report and to the invoices provided I am satisfied that the costs were properly and reasonably incurred.

This part of the claim is proven. Filing fee

The landlord has been largely successful in their application and I will award them the filing fee of $28.00.

Reasons

Background

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5332900 — net $12,937.35 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears 28 June to 7 July 2025	$600.00	Rent arrears 28 June to 7 July 2025
Previous order application 5254900 dated 23/06/2025	$2,836.42	Previous order application 5254900 dated 23/06/2025
Water rates	$719.18	Water rates
Window repairs	$1,623.00	Window repairs
Replace carpet	$1,075.25	Replace carpet
Painting and minor repairs	$1,581.25	Painting and minor repairs
Cleaning, rubbish removal, lawns and gardens	$4,474.25	Cleaning, rubbish removal, lawns and gardens
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	57. This part of the claim is proven.
Net award	$12,937.35
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$12,937.35