What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5335080 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 5335080?

Compensation: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Compensation: $2,760.00 awarded to landlord; Compensation: $382.00 awarded to landlord; Compensation: $88.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,910.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5335080?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5335080?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13049700-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5335080 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 5335080?

Compensation: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Compensation: $2,760.00 awarded to landlord; Compensation: $382.00 awarded to landlord; Compensation: $88.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,910.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5335080?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5335080?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13049700-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5335080 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5335080 — net $5,168.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears as of 7 August 2025	$1,910.00	Rent arrears as of 7 August 2025
Compensation for damage	$1,000.00	Compensation for damage
Compensation for rent loss	$1,000.00	Compensation for rent loss
Compensation for garage door	$2,760.00	Compensation for garage door
Compensation for blind and curtains	$382.00	Compensation for blind and curtains
Compensation for tip fees	$88.00	Compensation for tip fees
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$5,168.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,168.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlords name and identifying details.
Tyrone Cobb must pay [The landlord/s] $5,168.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,000.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately. DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears as of 7 August 2025$1,910.00 Compensation for damage$1,000.00 Compensation for rent loss$1,000.00 Compensation for garage door$2,760.00 Compensation for blind and curtains$382.00 Compensation for tip fees$88.00 Filing fee reimbursement$28.00 Total award$7,168.00 Minus bond- $2,000.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$5,168.00

Reasons

The Tribunal must consider an application filed by the landlord against the tenant. The landlord seeks various orders following the end of the tenancy, including rent arrears, and compensation for damage to the premises.
Only the landlord appeared at the hearing today. I am satisfied that the tenant has been properly notified of the hearing, and therefore I will proceed to consider the claim in his absence.

BACKGROUND

The tenancy commenced on 6 September 2022. Mr Cobb is the sole tenant.
The tenancy ended on 7 August 2025, following a 90-day termination notice from the landlord.
The landlords position is that when the premises were returned, that a range of damage was present which the tenant should be liable for. I will discuss that damage more fully below.
An application was filed with the Tribunal to recover rent arrears and damage, and that is the subject of this decision.

LANDLORDS CLAIMS

At the hearing, the landlord confirmed their claims are as follows: a. Rent arrears b. Compensation for repairs c. Compensation for rent losses d. Compensation for garage door damage e. Compensation for blinds and curtains f. Tip fees

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations.
That includes a requirement that the party bringing the claim (the applicant), establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. The balance of probabilities means more likely than unlikely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely.

ANALYSIS

I will now consider the landlord’s claims in turn. Claim 1- Rent arrears
The landlord states that when the tenant gave notice, he effectively stopped paying rent. The landlord has provided a rent ledger which establishes the rent arrears as of 7 August 2025 (the date the tenancy ended) was $1,910.00.
The tenant must pay rent when it falls due. The landlord has established this claim which is ordered in full. Claim 2 – Insurance excess
The landlord seeks the insurance excess of $1,000 for carpet replacement, vanity replacement and wall repairs, which the landlord considers was work needed to address damage caused by the tenant.
With any compensation claim, to receive an order the applicant must incur a loss. In short, the compensation is intended as best money can do, to compensate for the actual loss incurred.
Where a landlord claims compensation for damage caused by a tenant, the landlord must first prove the damage is more than fair wear and tear, and that it occurred during the tenancy. 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, the tenant's liability is limited to the lesser of the insurance excess or four weeks' rent.
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.
Damage is intentional where a person intends to cause damage and takes the necessary steps to achieve that purpose. Damage is also intentional when a person does something, or allows a situation to continue, knowing that damage is a certainty. See the High Court decision of Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.
In this case, I am satisfied that the claimed damage was caused during the tenancy, and is beyond fair wear and tear. In reaching that assessment, I have considered the pre-tenancy photographs that have been provided, as well as the exit photographs following Mr Cobb’s tenancy. I have also considered the documentary evidence such as the quotations and reports.
In relation to the walls, the evidence supports that there are holes in some walls, and other walls have paint or drawing marks on them, the damage is reasonably extensive throughout the house. The landlord obtained a quotation for those repairs from ‘The Wairarapa Handyman’ at $12,033.60.
The carpets appear to have been in very good condition at the start of the tenancy, but there was extensive staining at the end of Mr Cobb’s tenancy. The landlord has attempted to have the carpets commercially cleaned, but that was not successful, and carpet placement is required. The quotation for the carpet replacement is $6,847.
The bathroom vanity was in good condition at the start of the tenancy. At the end of the tenancy the vanity was significantly damaged, no doubt from excessive water exposure. The drawers appear to have been significantly marked or damaged. The vanity requires replacement.
In this case, the landlord is only seeking to recover the insurance access for those items. The claim is $1000. I am certain that the amount claimed by the landlord would be very well below the depreciated value of the damaged items, so this is ordered in full. Claim 3 – Loss of rent insurance excess
The landlord claims a loss of rent while the premises were being remediated. The loss of rent is covered within the landlord’s insurance policy, but there is a $1,000 excess. The landlord advised that the remediation work has not yet been completed.
It is not unusual for a landlord to have a short period of time at the end of a tenancy, before the next tenancy is rented. In this case however, the damage and work required to remediate the tenancy from damage caused by the tenant has been significant. The landlord has incurred a rent loss well beyond that which would be anticipated at the end of a tenancy, and the tenant is liable to compensate the landlord for that loss.
As noted the landlord has claimed the rent losses by way of an insurance policy, but the excess is $1,000, and the tenant must be liable for that. Claim 4 – Garage door
The landlord claims for damage to the garage door. This was not covered by the landlord’s insurance.
The photographs provided support a conclusion that the garage door has been struck or forced in some way – it is bent. I understand the insurer considers this to be malicious damage.
As discussed above, when damage is caused during the tenancy, which is not fair, we tear, which the garage door certainly would not be, then the onus is on the tenant to prove that the damage was not careless or intentional damage. I find the tenant has not established that.
I am satisfied that the tenant must be liable for the garage door replacement which is $2,700, and that is ordered in full Claim 5 – Blind replacement
The landlord claims $764 for the replacement of curtains and blinds damaged or missing at the end of the tenancy. The curtains were installed in 2021.
Curtains and blinds, like any chattels, must be returned to the landlord at the end of the tenancy. When the tenant does not return those items, then the tenant will be liable for them. I am also satisfied in relation to the curtains that were left in the premises, that it is more likely than not, that they were damaged. The damage occurred during the tenancy, and it is beyond fair wear and tear. The tenant has not proven that the damage is anything other than careless or intentional damage.
The landlord has claimed $764 for the curtain replacement. The curtains were installed in 2021, and it can be expected that over the course of time, there would have been depreciation in those items, as curtains do not last indefinitely. Taking depreciation into account, I consider a fair contribution toward the curtain replacement would be half of the amount claimed, and therefore order the tenant to pay $382.00. Claim 6 – Tip fees
The landlord claims $88.00 for tip fees.
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) requires that the landlord provide the premises to the tenant at the start of the tenancy in a reasonable state of cleanliness, and there is an equivalent obligation on the tenant to return the premises: ...in a reasonably clean and reasonably tidy condition, and remove or arrange for the removal from the premises of all rubbish.
I am satisfied that the tenant left a range of rubbish or items on the tenancy, when possession was returned to the landlord. The tenant has not complied with his statutory obligation to return the premises clean and tidy, and arrange for rubbish removal. In this case, the landlord has only claimed the cost of the tip fees, and that is ordered in full.

FILING FEE

Because the applicant has been wholly successful in their application, I must award the filing paid to commence the proceeding in the Tribunal.

BOND

The Tribunal orders the full bond held in the Bond Centre to be released to the landlord.

NAME SUPPRESSION

The Tribunal can order name suppression when a party has been wholly or substantially successful in the proceeding. In this case the landlord has applied for name suppression. As the landlord has been wholly successful in the claim, landlord name suppression is ordered.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5335080 — net $5,168.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears as of 7 August 2025	$1,910.00	Rent arrears as of 7 August 2025
Compensation for damage	$1,000.00	Compensation for damage
Compensation for rent loss	$1,000.00	Compensation for rent loss
Compensation for garage door	$2,760.00	Compensation for garage door
Compensation for blind and curtains	$382.00	Compensation for blind and curtains
Compensation for tip fees	$88.00	Compensation for tip fees
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$5,168.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,168.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlords name and identifying details.
Tyrone Cobb must pay [The landlord/s] $5,168.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,000.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately. DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears as of 7 August 2025$1,910.00 Compensation for damage$1,000.00 Compensation for rent loss$1,000.00 Compensation for garage door$2,760.00 Compensation for blind and curtains$382.00 Compensation for tip fees$88.00 Filing fee reimbursement$28.00 Total award$7,168.00 Minus bond- $2,000.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$5,168.00

Reasons

The Tribunal must consider an application filed by the landlord against the tenant. The landlord seeks various orders following the end of the tenancy, including rent arrears, and compensation for damage to the premises.
Only the landlord appeared at the hearing today. I am satisfied that the tenant has been properly notified of the hearing, and therefore I will proceed to consider the claim in his absence.

BACKGROUND

The tenancy commenced on 6 September 2022. Mr Cobb is the sole tenant.
The tenancy ended on 7 August 2025, following a 90-day termination notice from the landlord.
The landlords position is that when the premises were returned, that a range of damage was present which the tenant should be liable for. I will discuss that damage more fully below.
An application was filed with the Tribunal to recover rent arrears and damage, and that is the subject of this decision.

LANDLORDS CLAIMS

At the hearing, the landlord confirmed their claims are as follows: a. Rent arrears b. Compensation for repairs c. Compensation for rent losses d. Compensation for garage door damage e. Compensation for blinds and curtains f. Tip fees

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations.
That includes a requirement that the party bringing the claim (the applicant), establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. The balance of probabilities means more likely than unlikely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely.

ANALYSIS

I will now consider the landlord’s claims in turn. Claim 1- Rent arrears
The landlord states that when the tenant gave notice, he effectively stopped paying rent. The landlord has provided a rent ledger which establishes the rent arrears as of 7 August 2025 (the date the tenancy ended) was $1,910.00.
The tenant must pay rent when it falls due. The landlord has established this claim which is ordered in full. Claim 2 – Insurance excess
The landlord seeks the insurance excess of $1,000 for carpet replacement, vanity replacement and wall repairs, which the landlord considers was work needed to address damage caused by the tenant.
With any compensation claim, to receive an order the applicant must incur a loss. In short, the compensation is intended as best money can do, to compensate for the actual loss incurred.
Where a landlord claims compensation for damage caused by a tenant, the landlord must first prove the damage is more than fair wear and tear, and that it occurred during the tenancy. 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, the tenant's liability is limited to the lesser of the insurance excess or four weeks' rent.
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.
Damage is intentional where a person intends to cause damage and takes the necessary steps to achieve that purpose. Damage is also intentional when a person does something, or allows a situation to continue, knowing that damage is a certainty. See the High Court decision of Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.
In this case, I am satisfied that the claimed damage was caused during the tenancy, and is beyond fair wear and tear. In reaching that assessment, I have considered the pre-tenancy photographs that have been provided, as well as the exit photographs following Mr Cobb’s tenancy. I have also considered the documentary evidence such as the quotations and reports.
In relation to the walls, the evidence supports that there are holes in some walls, and other walls have paint or drawing marks on them, the damage is reasonably extensive throughout the house. The landlord obtained a quotation for those repairs from ‘The Wairarapa Handyman’ at $12,033.60.
The carpets appear to have been in very good condition at the start of the tenancy, but there was extensive staining at the end of Mr Cobb’s tenancy. The landlord has attempted to have the carpets commercially cleaned, but that was not successful, and carpet placement is required. The quotation for the carpet replacement is $6,847.
The bathroom vanity was in good condition at the start of the tenancy. At the end of the tenancy the vanity was significantly damaged, no doubt from excessive water exposure. The drawers appear to have been significantly marked or damaged. The vanity requires replacement.
In this case, the landlord is only seeking to recover the insurance access for those items. The claim is $1000. I am certain that the amount claimed by the landlord would be very well below the depreciated value of the damaged items, so this is ordered in full. Claim 3 – Loss of rent insurance excess
The landlord claims a loss of rent while the premises were being remediated. The loss of rent is covered within the landlord’s insurance policy, but there is a $1,000 excess. The landlord advised that the remediation work has not yet been completed.
It is not unusual for a landlord to have a short period of time at the end of a tenancy, before the next tenancy is rented. In this case however, the damage and work required to remediate the tenancy from damage caused by the tenant has been significant. The landlord has incurred a rent loss well beyond that which would be anticipated at the end of a tenancy, and the tenant is liable to compensate the landlord for that loss.
As noted the landlord has claimed the rent losses by way of an insurance policy, but the excess is $1,000, and the tenant must be liable for that. Claim 4 – Garage door
The landlord claims for damage to the garage door. This was not covered by the landlord’s insurance.
The photographs provided support a conclusion that the garage door has been struck or forced in some way – it is bent. I understand the insurer considers this to be malicious damage.
As discussed above, when damage is caused during the tenancy, which is not fair, we tear, which the garage door certainly would not be, then the onus is on the tenant to prove that the damage was not careless or intentional damage. I find the tenant has not established that.
I am satisfied that the tenant must be liable for the garage door replacement which is $2,700, and that is ordered in full Claim 5 – Blind replacement
The landlord claims $764 for the replacement of curtains and blinds damaged or missing at the end of the tenancy. The curtains were installed in 2021.
Curtains and blinds, like any chattels, must be returned to the landlord at the end of the tenancy. When the tenant does not return those items, then the tenant will be liable for them. I am also satisfied in relation to the curtains that were left in the premises, that it is more likely than not, that they were damaged. The damage occurred during the tenancy, and it is beyond fair wear and tear. The tenant has not proven that the damage is anything other than careless or intentional damage.
The landlord has claimed $764 for the curtain replacement. The curtains were installed in 2021, and it can be expected that over the course of time, there would have been depreciation in those items, as curtains do not last indefinitely. Taking depreciation into account, I consider a fair contribution toward the curtain replacement would be half of the amount claimed, and therefore order the tenant to pay $382.00. Claim 6 – Tip fees
The landlord claims $88.00 for tip fees.
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) requires that the landlord provide the premises to the tenant at the start of the tenancy in a reasonable state of cleanliness, and there is an equivalent obligation on the tenant to return the premises: ...in a reasonably clean and reasonably tidy condition, and remove or arrange for the removal from the premises of all rubbish.
I am satisfied that the tenant left a range of rubbish or items on the tenancy, when possession was returned to the landlord. The tenant has not complied with his statutory obligation to return the premises clean and tidy, and arrange for rubbish removal. In this case, the landlord has only claimed the cost of the tip fees, and that is ordered in full.

FILING FEE

Because the applicant has been wholly successful in their application, I must award the filing paid to commence the proceeding in the Tribunal.

BOND

The Tribunal orders the full bond held in the Bond Centre to be released to the landlord.

NAME SUPPRESSION

The Tribunal can order name suppression when a party has been wholly or substantially successful in the proceeding. In this case the landlord has applied for name suppression. As the landlord has been wholly successful in the claim, landlord name suppression is ordered.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5335080 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5335080 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

BACKGROUND

LANDLORDS CLAIMS

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

ANALYSIS

FILING FEE

BOND

NAME SUPPRESSION

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

BACKGROUND

LANDLORDS CLAIMS

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

ANALYSIS

FILING FEE

BOND

NAME SUPPRESSION

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions