What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5340182 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 5340182?

Cleaning: $350.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $350.75 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Painting: $900.74 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $108.00 awarded to landlord; Removal Of Couch Dumped Over Balcony: $350.75 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,872.50 awarded to landlord; During Tenancy (February 2025: $138.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Fire Rated Door: $676.19 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $805.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5340182?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5340182?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13373528-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5340182 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 5340182?

Cleaning: $350.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $350.75 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Painting: $900.74 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $108.00 awarded to landlord; Removal Of Couch Dumped Over Balcony: $350.75 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,872.50 awarded to landlord; During Tenancy (February 2025: $138.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Fire Rated Door: $676.19 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $805.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5340182?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5340182?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13373528-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5340182 — Rent arrears

Reasons

Background

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5340182 — net $5,939.93 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 4 April 2025	$2,872.50	Rent arrears to 4 April 2025
Cleaning	$350.00	39. On the evidence available to me I will award the [Landlord/s] and [Cleaning company 1] invoices, but not the [Cleaning company 2] invoice.
Lock/key replacement	$108.00	Lock/key replacement
Removal of couch dumped over balcony	$350.75	Removal of couch dumped over balcony
Repairs: During tenancy (February 2025	$138.00	Repairs: During tenancy (February 2025
Cleaning: and rubbish removal ([The landlord/s	$350.75	39. On the evidence available to me I will award the [Landlord/s] and [Cleaning company 1] invoices, but not the [Cleaning company 2] invoice.
Rubbish removal: Large items	$805.00	Rubbish removal: Large items
Repairs: Replace fire rated door	$676.19	Repairs: Replace fire rated door
Painting	$900.74	Painting
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$5,939.93
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,939.93

The tenancy began on 17 April 2019.

The premises is a flat located above retail premises in [Suburb].

The tenancy ended on or around 4 April 2025.

The landlord filed this application on 16 September 2025. The application seeks rent arrears, repairs, painting, cleaning, and rubbish removal costs.

The hearing took place on 27 March 2026 in [Event location suppressed]. [The landlord’s representatives] represented [The landlord/s] at the hearing. There was no appearance by the tenant. Service

Although there is some lack of clarity around the end date of the tenancy, it appears that the tenancy ended in April / May 2025.

This application was filed in September, more than two months after the end of the tenancy.

Mr Foley did not provide an email address for service.

The application has not been served on Mr Foley in accordance with the requirements of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”). 1

I am satisfied that the landlords made all reasonable efforts to contact the tenant. They have not been successful. Part of the reason for landlord’s delay in filing this application was wanting to give every possible chance to resolve the claim with the tenant before proceeding to the Tenancy Tribunal.

Where an application has not served on the tenant the Tribunal may: a. Direct that, instead of service in accordance with the RTA, some other step is taken that is likely to bring the application to the tenant’s attention (substituted service); or b. Dispense with the requirement for service and proceed as if notice has been served on the tenant.

This instance, there are no viable options for substituted service.

In my view it is appropriate in this instance to dispense with the requirement for service and to proceed. It would be unjust to leave the landlord without a remedy. There are significant rent arrears and damage to the premises that the tenant must be aware of. 1 Section 91A(2) RTA Rent arrears

The landlord provided a rent record that goes through to 6 May 2025 but has a handwritten notation on it: Reversed. Vacated 4/4/25. Rent arrears $2,872.50

The application sought rent arrears of $2,872.50.

The application states that the end date is 28 September 2025, but it is unclear where this date comes from.

[The landlord’s representatives] were not personally involved with the tenancy and were uncertain of when the tenancy ended.

The most probable end date is 4 April 2025. This aligns with the claim for rent arrears. Damage

Tenants are liable for damage beyond fair wear and tear that occurs during the tenancy. Tenants are liable for damage that is caused by them, or by anyone who is at the premises with their consent.

The landlord seeks costs relating to the following damage: a. Wall in lounge painted without consent. b. Entry door broken.

The landlord provided photographs showing the ‘feature wall’ painted by the tenant without consent, and the front door smashed in.

The damage occurred during the tenancy and is intentional damage.

There is no evidence to suggest that the damage was caused by someone other the tenant or a person for whom the tenant was responsible.

The cost of replacing the front door is proven. The door is a fire proof door, so it was expensive to replace.

The claim seeks $2,640.00 for painting the lounge wall, and other parts of the property, per an invoice from [Contractor]. The landlord’s photographs show some minor damage to walls and ceilings, but the principal basis of the painting claim against the tenant is the lounge wall.

The paintwork was at least six years old when the re-painting was done. Depreciation must apply.

Having regard to the age of the existing paintwork, and the limited evidence of tenant damage necessitating repainting of walls and ceilings other than the lounge wall, I will award 25% of the painting cost claimed.

I note that there is a second painting invoice from [Contractor], dated 18 July 2025, for “skirting boards around ceiling that wasn’t in job card, 2 workers”. There is insufficient evidence to establish that this second painting cost related to careless or intentional damage that occurred during Mr Foley’s tenancy. The tenant is not liable for this cost. Cleaning, rubbish removal, change of locks

Tenants must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, remove all rubbish, and return the keys at the end of the tenancy. 2

Mr Foley did not return the keys at the end of the tenancy. The cost of changing locks is proven.

Mr Foley left multiple large items of furniture, as well as general rubbish, at the premises.

During the tenancy, there was an incident where a couch was thrown over the balcony of Mr Foley’s unit onto the awning of the retail premises below. Retrieval and disposal of the couch required specialist equipment. The cost of that exercise alone was $350.75.

[The landlord/s] did some basic cleaning and disposal of small items of rubbish.

[Contractor] removed and disposed of the larger items.

The cost of rubbish removal is proven and is fair and reasonable regard to the landlord’s photographs.

The claim includes three invoices for cleaning related costs: [The landlord/s] (cleaning and rubbish) $350.75 [Cleaning company 1] (vacuum and general clean)$350.00 [Cleaning company 2]$2,100.00

The evidence in support of the cleaning claim is very limited. The photographs do not support the claim for $2,800.00 worth of cleaning.

I also note that the [Cleaning company 2] invoice is dated 15 July, more than three months after the tenant vacated.

On the evidence available to me I will award the [Landlord/s] and [Cleaning company 1] invoices, but not the [Cleaning company 2] invoice. Filing fee, name suppression, bond

The bond will be released to the landlord. 2 Section 40(1)(e)(iii) & (iv) RTA

The landlord was substantially successful in this application. Name suppression is granted to the landlord. 3

I must also award the landlord the filing fee of $28.00. 4 .

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5340182 — net $5,939.93 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 4 April 2025	$2,872.50	Rent arrears to 4 April 2025
Cleaning	$350.00	39. On the evidence available to me I will award the [Landlord/s] and [Cleaning company 1] invoices, but not the [Cleaning company 2] invoice.
Lock/key replacement	$108.00	Lock/key replacement
Removal of couch dumped over balcony	$350.75	Removal of couch dumped over balcony
Repairs: During tenancy (February 2025	$138.00	Repairs: During tenancy (February 2025
Cleaning: and rubbish removal ([The landlord/s	$350.75	39. On the evidence available to me I will award the [Landlord/s] and [Cleaning company 1] invoices, but not the [Cleaning company 2] invoice.
Rubbish removal: Large items	$805.00	Rubbish removal: Large items
Repairs: Replace fire rated door	$676.19	Repairs: Replace fire rated door
Painting	$900.74	Painting
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$5,939.93
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,939.93

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord name and identifying details. 2. 3.

Reasons

Background

The tenancy began on 17 April 2019.
The premises is a flat located above retail premises in [Suburb].
The tenancy ended on or around 4 April 2025.
The landlord filed this application on 16 September 2025. The application seeks rent arrears, repairs, painting, cleaning, and rubbish removal costs.
The hearing took place on 27 March 2026 in [Event location suppressed]. [The landlord’s representatives] represented [The landlord/s] at the hearing. There was no appearance by the tenant. Service
Although there is some lack of clarity around the end date of the tenancy, it appears that the tenancy ended in April / May 2025.
This application was filed in September, more than two months after the end of the tenancy.
Mr Foley did not provide an email address for service.
The application has not been served on Mr Foley in accordance with the requirements of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”). 1
I am satisfied that the landlords made all reasonable efforts to contact the tenant. They have not been successful. Part of the reason for landlord’s delay in filing this application was wanting to give every possible chance to resolve the claim with the tenant before proceeding to the Tenancy Tribunal.
Where an application has not served on the tenant the Tribunal may: a. Direct that, instead of service in accordance with the RTA, some other step is taken that is likely to bring the application to the tenant’s attention (substituted service); or b. Dispense with the requirement for service and proceed as if notice has been served on the tenant.
This instance, there are no viable options for substituted service.
In my view it is appropriate in this instance to dispense with the requirement for service and to proceed. It would be unjust to leave the landlord without a remedy. There are significant rent arrears and damage to the premises that the tenant must be aware of. 1 Section 91A(2) RTA Rent arrears
The landlord provided a rent record that goes through to 6 May 2025 but has a handwritten notation on it: Reversed. Vacated 4/4/25. Rent arrears $2,872.50
The application sought rent arrears of $2,872.50.
The application states that the end date is 28 September 2025, but it is unclear where this date comes from.
[The landlord’s representatives] were not personally involved with the tenancy and were uncertain of when the tenancy ended.
The most probable end date is 4 April 2025. This aligns with the claim for rent arrears. Damage
Tenants are liable for damage beyond fair wear and tear that occurs during the tenancy. Tenants are liable for damage that is caused by them, or by anyone who is at the premises with their consent.
The landlord seeks costs relating to the following damage: a. Wall in lounge painted without consent. b. Entry door broken.
The landlord provided photographs showing the ‘feature wall’ painted by the tenant without consent, and the front door smashed in.
The damage occurred during the tenancy and is intentional damage.
There is no evidence to suggest that the damage was caused by someone other the tenant or a person for whom the tenant was responsible.
The cost of replacing the front door is proven. The door is a fire proof door, so it was expensive to replace.
The claim seeks $2,640.00 for painting the lounge wall, and other parts of the property, per an invoice from [Contractor]. The landlord’s photographs show some minor damage to walls and ceilings, but the principal basis of the painting claim against the tenant is the lounge wall.
The paintwork was at least six years old when the re-painting was done. Depreciation must apply.
Having regard to the age of the existing paintwork, and the limited evidence of tenant damage necessitating repainting of walls and ceilings other than the lounge wall, I will award 25% of the painting cost claimed.
I note that there is a second painting invoice from [Contractor], dated 18 July 2025, for “skirting boards around ceiling that wasn’t in job card, 2 workers”. There is insufficient evidence to establish that this second painting cost related to careless or intentional damage that occurred during Mr Foley’s tenancy. The tenant is not liable for this cost. Cleaning, rubbish removal, change of locks
Tenants must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, remove all rubbish, and return the keys at the end of the tenancy. 2
Mr Foley did not return the keys at the end of the tenancy. The cost of changing locks is proven.
Mr Foley left multiple large items of furniture, as well as general rubbish, at the premises.
During the tenancy, there was an incident where a couch was thrown over the balcony of Mr Foley’s unit onto the awning of the retail premises below. Retrieval and disposal of the couch required specialist equipment. The cost of that exercise alone was $350.75.
[The landlord/s] did some basic cleaning and disposal of small items of rubbish.
[Contractor] removed and disposed of the larger items.
The cost of rubbish removal is proven and is fair and reasonable regard to the landlord’s photographs.
The claim includes three invoices for cleaning related costs: [The landlord/s] (cleaning and rubbish) $350.75 [Cleaning company 1] (vacuum and general clean)$350.00 [Cleaning company 2]$2,100.00
The evidence in support of the cleaning claim is very limited. The photographs do not support the claim for $2,800.00 worth of cleaning.
I also note that the [Cleaning company 2] invoice is dated 15 July, more than three months after the tenant vacated.
On the evidence available to me I will award the [Landlord/s] and [Cleaning company 1] invoices, but not the [Cleaning company 2] invoice. Filing fee, name suppression, bond
The bond will be released to the landlord. 2 Section 40(1)(e)(iii) & (iv) RTA
The landlord was substantially successful in this application. Name suppression is granted to the landlord. 3
I must also award the landlord the filing fee of $28.00. 4 .

Tenancy Tribunal case 5340182 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5340182 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions