How much money was awarded in case 5333301?

Property Damage: $2,320.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5333301?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5333301?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12904183-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5333301?

Property Damage: $2,320.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5333301?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5333301?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12904183-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5333301 — Property damage

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5333301 about?

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

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5333301 — net $2,320.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Repairs	$2,320.00	Repairs
Net award	$2,320.00
Bond	$2,320.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,320.00

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

Cynthia Pupu to pay [The landlord/s] $2,320.00 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,320.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the remote hearing on 18 December 2025.

The landlord has applied for compensation and refund of the bond following the end of the tenancy.

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. The landlord’s insurance excess is $5,250.00 and accordingly the maximum tenant liability for careless damage is $2,320.00.

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 following damage was caused during the tenancy: The premises are over two levels. A separate tenancy relates to each level. The landlord is the owner of both premises.

The tenant had her mother living with her. On the first occasion when the landlord says that damage was caused, the tenant’s mother left the tap in the toilet vanity running. The tap overflowed and flooded the area causing damage. The landlord did not seek compensation for this damage from the tenant.

A short time later, a repeat of the incident occurred with damage being caused to the premises and leaks down through to the downstairs premises. The costs of repairs were substantial. I accept that the damage was caused carelessly. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

At the hearing, the tenant said that she had continued to pay rent after the end of the tenancy as a contribution towards the damage. The landlord has provided a payment summary for the period following the tenancy. The payment summary shows regular payments by the tenant of $20.00 since the end of the tenancy. The landlord says these payments have been made under an arrangement for the tenant to pay her outstanding water account.

The amounts ordered are proved.

Both parties applied for name suppression. The landlord has been wholly successful in this matter and suppression of the landlords name and details is ordered. The tenant has not been wholly or substantially successful in this matter. The tenants application form name suppression is dismissed.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5333301 — net $2,320.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Repairs	$2,320.00	Repairs
Net award	$2,320.00
Bond	$2,320.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,320.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name and identifying details.
Cynthia Pupu to pay [The landlord/s] $2,320.00 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,320.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the remote hearing on 18 December 2025.
The landlord has applied for compensation and refund of the bond following the end of the tenancy.

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. The landlord’s insurance excess is $5,250.00 and accordingly the maximum tenant liability for careless damage is $2,320.00.
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 following damage was caused during the tenancy: The premises are over two levels. A separate tenancy relates to each level. The landlord is the owner of both premises.
The tenant had her mother living with her. On the first occasion when the landlord says that damage was caused, the tenant’s mother left the tap in the toilet vanity running. The tap overflowed and flooded the area causing damage. The landlord did not seek compensation for this damage from the tenant.
A short time later, a repeat of the incident occurred with damage being caused to the premises and leaks down through to the downstairs premises. The costs of repairs were substantial. I accept that the damage was caused carelessly. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
At the hearing, the tenant said that she had continued to pay rent after the end of the tenancy as a contribution towards the damage. The landlord has provided a payment summary for the period following the tenancy. The payment summary shows regular payments by the tenant of $20.00 since the end of the tenancy. The landlord says these payments have been made under an arrangement for the tenant to pay her outstanding water account.
The amounts ordered are proved.
Both parties applied for name suppression. The landlord has been wholly successful in this matter and suppression of the landlords name and details is ordered. The tenant has not been wholly or substantially successful in this matter. The tenants application form name suppression is dismissed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5333301 — Property damage

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5333301 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions