What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5341899 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 5341899?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $3,434.00 awarded to landlord; Two 9m2 Skip Bins (9/8/25 And 22/8/2…: $1,642.26 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5341899?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5341899?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12772221-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5341899 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 5341899?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $3,434.00 awarded to landlord; Two 9m2 Skip Bins (9/8/25 And 22/8/2…: $1,642.26 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5341899?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5341899?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12772221-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5341899 — Tenancy dispute

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5341899 — net $1,904.26 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Two 9m2 skip bins (9/8/25 and 22/8/25	$1,642.26	Two 9m2 skip bins (9/8/25 and 22/8/25
Mow lawns, rubbish removal and repairs to interior and exterior walls	$3,434.00	Mow lawns, rubbish removal and repairs to interior and exterior walls
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,904.26
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,904.26

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name and identifying details.
Pitokino Tinisia hunuhunu and Daljit Kumar must pay [The landlord] $1,904.26 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,200.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord] immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not.
I am satisfied that the tenant had received proper notice of the hearing time, date and place and chose not to attend.
The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

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

At the end of the tenancy the tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, remove all rubbish, return all keys and security devices, and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The lawns were not mown.
The amounts ordered are proved.

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.
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: a. Interior walls required plastering, sanding and repainting; b. Interior doors required plastering, sanding and repainting; c. Wallpaper was torn and needed replacing; and d. The exterior walls had holes that needed repair.
The landlord provided photographic evidence that proves the damage occurred during the tenancy and was because of the careless acts or omissions by the tenants or some other persons in the premise with their consent. The evidence proves that the damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenants have not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved.
I have considered betterment and depreciation. The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached their obligations and should not be better or worse off. In calculating depreciation, I have considered the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Reimbursement of filing fee
Section 102(4) of the RTA confirms that applicants that are wholly or substantially successful in proving their claims will have their filing fee reimbursed.
Because [The applicant] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee. Name suppression
The landlord applies for non-publication of his name and identifying details.
The Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
The landlord has substantially succeeded in his proceedings. I do not consider publication is in the public interest or justified because of the landlord’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
Non-publication is ordered.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5341899 — net $1,904.26 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Two 9m2 skip bins (9/8/25 and 22/8/25	$1,642.26	Two 9m2 skip bins (9/8/25 and 22/8/25
Mow lawns, rubbish removal and repairs to interior and exterior walls	$3,434.00	Mow lawns, rubbish removal and repairs to interior and exterior walls
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,904.26
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,904.26

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name and identifying details.
Pitokino Tinisia hunuhunu and Daljit Kumar must pay [The landlord] $1,904.26 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,200.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord] immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not.
I am satisfied that the tenant had received proper notice of the hearing time, date and place and chose not to attend.
The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

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

At the end of the tenancy the tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, remove all rubbish, return all keys and security devices, and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The lawns were not mown.
The amounts ordered are proved.

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.
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: a. Interior walls required plastering, sanding and repainting; b. Interior doors required plastering, sanding and repainting; c. Wallpaper was torn and needed replacing; and d. The exterior walls had holes that needed repair.
The landlord provided photographic evidence that proves the damage occurred during the tenancy and was because of the careless acts or omissions by the tenants or some other persons in the premise with their consent. The evidence proves that the damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenants have not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved.
I have considered betterment and depreciation. The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached their obligations and should not be better or worse off. In calculating depreciation, I have considered the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Reimbursement of filing fee
Section 102(4) of the RTA confirms that applicants that are wholly or substantially successful in proving their claims will have their filing fee reimbursed.
Because [The applicant] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee. Name suppression
The landlord applies for non-publication of his name and identifying details.
The Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
The landlord has substantially succeeded in his proceedings. I do not consider publication is in the public interest or justified because of the landlord’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
Non-publication is ordered.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5341899 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5341899 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

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

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

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions