How much money was awarded in case 5337820?

Cleaning: $25.90 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $7.99 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $557.70 awarded to landlord; To The Deck: $211.78 awarded to landlord; to the wiring and the electrical ins…: $1,194.35 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $479.58 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $285.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5337820?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Exemplary damages, Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5337820?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13708078-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5337820?

Cleaning: $25.90 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $7.99 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $557.70 awarded to landlord; To The Deck: $211.78 awarded to landlord; to the wiring and the electrical ins…: $1,194.35 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $479.58 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $285.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5337820?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Exemplary damages, Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5337820?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13708078-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5337820 — Property damage

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5337820 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 5337820 — net $2,361.73 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Lock/key replacement	$557.70	Lock/key replacement
Rubbish removal	$479.58	Rubbish removal
Cleaning	$25.90	Cleaning
Cleaning	$7.99	Cleaning
Repairs: to the deck	$211.78	Repairs: to the deck
Repairs: to the wiring and the electrical inspection	$1,194.35	Repairs: to the wiring and the electrical inspection
Exemplary damages unlawful use	$1,000.00	Exemplary damages unlawful use
Water rates	$285.00	Water rates
Net award	$2,361.73
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,361.73

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

Nam Thanh Le must pay [The landlord/s] $2,361.73 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

All other claims are dismissed.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,400.57 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing.

The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. On 27 August 2025 the landlords were advised by the police that the tenancy premises were being used to cultivate cannabis. There was significant damage to the inside of the house and to the electrical wiring. The insurer paid the full lump sum available under the landlords’ policy for deliberate damage and paid lost rent to 16 December 2025.

Can I make a further order for rent?

The landlord has submitted that the house is still uninhabitable because the amount provided by the insurer is in no way enough to carry out repairs and get the house to a condition where it can be tenanted again. They want an order the tenant pay rent until the house is habitable, or that the tenant pay rent to the end of the fixed term tenancy which was in April 2026. I was provided with information from the insurer at the hearing and I have read this.

I am not persuaded I can make this order. In October 2025 I made an order for rent arrears to 8 September 2025, which was the day the landlord changed the locks and took possession. The fixed term tenancy ended when the landlord took possession, so I cannot also make an order the tenant pay rent until April 2026.

I can consider a claim for loss of rent. The usual process is for the landlords to provide quotes and reports from builders to prove how long the repair process will take. I was not provided with any of that information, even though we adjourned to allow the landlords to sort insurance and provide updated information to support their claims. Also, it is unlikely I would allow more than the 14 weeks already provided by the insurer. The claims for lost rent and for rent until the house is made habitable are dismissed.

Does the tenant owe water rates?

The landlord provided records which show the tenant owed water rates at the end of the tenancy. This claim is proved.

Did the tenant comply with his obligations at the end of the tenancy?

There is a claim for rubbish removal and a small amount of cleaning. Tenants are required to return the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy state and remove their rubbish at the end of the tenancy. See section 40(1)(c) and (e)(iii) Residential Tenancies Act (RTA).

To determine what is reasonably clean and tidy the Tribunal must evaluate the evidence available, and in particular inspection reports and photographs. The landlords provided me with photos which prove their claims for rubbish removal and cleaning.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The landlords have provided invoices and claimed a small amount for repairing damage. The landlord must prove that the 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.

There was damage to the lock, the deck and the wiring. The landlords have proved this was caused during the tenancy. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The amounts ordered are proved.

Should I allow exemplary damages?

The landlords have proved the tenant used the premises unlawfully. Section 40(2)(b) RTA provides that tenants must not use the premises or permit the premises to be used for an unlawful purpose. Cultivating cannabis is illegal and a breach of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975. I find the tenant committed an unlawful act.

Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $1,800. See section 40(3A)(c) and Schedule 1A RTA.

Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. See section 109(3) RTA.

The tenancy premises was used for a commercial cannabis operation. The tenant must have acted intentionally. The effect for the landlord has been immense. They are financially stretched. They are scared to go to the house. They are under considerable stress. They have spent all the money provided by the insurer and the house still needs significant repairs. This should never happen in a tenancy and there is public interest in making an order for exemplary damages to penalise the tenant.

I allow $1000 in exemplary damages. This is higher than I would usually allow where there is no evidence the tenant has done this before, but the deliberate damage needed to carry out the cultivation warrants the higher amount. Other orders

I made an order for the filing fee in my last order.

I have organised for the bond to be refunded to the landlords.

There is an application for suppression. Section 95A RTA provides that the Tribunal may, on the application of any party to proceedings or on its own initiative, order that the name of a party not be published, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest. The landlords are the most successful party and suppression is allowed. The tenant’s name is published because there is public interest in such a serious breach of the RTA.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5337820 — net $2,361.73 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Lock/key replacement	$557.70	Lock/key replacement
Rubbish removal	$479.58	Rubbish removal
Cleaning	$25.90	Cleaning
Cleaning	$7.99	Cleaning
Repairs: to the deck	$211.78	Repairs: to the deck
Repairs: to the wiring and the electrical inspection	$1,194.35	Repairs: to the wiring and the electrical inspection
Exemplary damages unlawful use	$1,000.00	Exemplary damages unlawful use
Water rates	$285.00	Water rates
Net award	$2,361.73
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,361.73

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlords’ names and identifying details.
Nam Thanh Le must pay [The landlord/s] $2,361.73 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
All other claims are dismissed.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,400.57 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. On 27 August 2025 the landlords were advised by the police that the tenancy premises were being used to cultivate cannabis. There was significant damage to the inside of the house and to the electrical wiring. The insurer paid the full lump sum available under the landlords’ policy for deliberate damage and paid lost rent to 16 December 2025.

Can I make a further order for rent?

The landlord has submitted that the house is still uninhabitable because the amount provided by the insurer is in no way enough to carry out repairs and get the house to a condition where it can be tenanted again. They want an order the tenant pay rent until the house is habitable, or that the tenant pay rent to the end of the fixed term tenancy which was in April 2026. I was provided with information from the insurer at the hearing and I have read this.
I am not persuaded I can make this order. In October 2025 I made an order for rent arrears to 8 September 2025, which was the day the landlord changed the locks and took possession. The fixed term tenancy ended when the landlord took possession, so I cannot also make an order the tenant pay rent until April 2026.
I can consider a claim for loss of rent. The usual process is for the landlords to provide quotes and reports from builders to prove how long the repair process will take. I was not provided with any of that information, even though we adjourned to allow the landlords to sort insurance and provide updated information to support their claims. Also, it is unlikely I would allow more than the 14 weeks already provided by the insurer. The claims for lost rent and for rent until the house is made habitable are dismissed.

Does the tenant owe water rates?

The landlord provided records which show the tenant owed water rates at the end of the tenancy. This claim is proved.

Did the tenant comply with his obligations at the end of the tenancy?

There is a claim for rubbish removal and a small amount of cleaning. Tenants are required to return the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy state and remove their rubbish at the end of the tenancy. See section 40(1)(c) and (e)(iii) Residential Tenancies Act (RTA).
To determine what is reasonably clean and tidy the Tribunal must evaluate the evidence available, and in particular inspection reports and photographs. The landlords provided me with photos which prove their claims for rubbish removal and cleaning.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The landlords have provided invoices and claimed a small amount for repairing damage. The landlord must prove that the 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.
There was damage to the lock, the deck and the wiring. The landlords have proved this was caused during the tenancy. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The amounts ordered are proved.

Should I allow exemplary damages?

The landlords have proved the tenant used the premises unlawfully. Section 40(2)(b) RTA provides that tenants must not use the premises or permit the premises to be used for an unlawful purpose. Cultivating cannabis is illegal and a breach of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975. I find the tenant committed an unlawful act.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $1,800. See section 40(3A)(c) and Schedule 1A RTA.
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. See section 109(3) RTA.
The tenancy premises was used for a commercial cannabis operation. The tenant must have acted intentionally. The effect for the landlord has been immense. They are financially stretched. They are scared to go to the house. They are under considerable stress. They have spent all the money provided by the insurer and the house still needs significant repairs. This should never happen in a tenancy and there is public interest in making an order for exemplary damages to penalise the tenant.
I allow $1000 in exemplary damages. This is higher than I would usually allow where there is no evidence the tenant has done this before, but the deliberate damage needed to carry out the cultivation warrants the higher amount. Other orders
I made an order for the filing fee in my last order.
I have organised for the bond to be refunded to the landlords.
There is an application for suppression. Section 95A RTA provides that the Tribunal may, on the application of any party to proceedings or on its own initiative, order that the name of a party not be published, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest. The landlords are the most successful party and suppression is allowed. The tenant’s name is published because there is public interest in such a serious breach of the RTA.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5337820 — Property damage

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5337820 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Can I make a further order for rent?

Does the tenant owe water rates?

Did the tenant comply with his obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Should I allow exemplary damages?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Can I make a further order for rent?

Does the tenant owe water rates?

Did the tenant comply with his obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Should I allow exemplary damages?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions