What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5343960 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 5343960?

Cleaning: $448.50 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $730.00 awarded to landlord; Door Painting: $987.96 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Tribunal Order (5304251: $3,118.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,050.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $855.87 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $227.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $97.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $410.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,389.98 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $840.00 awarded to landlord; Rehang Wardrobe Door: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $420.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $240.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5343960?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5343960?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13078795-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5343960 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 5343960?

Cleaning: $448.50 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $730.00 awarded to landlord; Door Painting: $987.96 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Tribunal Order (5304251: $3,118.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,050.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $855.87 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $227.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $97.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $410.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,389.98 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $840.00 awarded to landlord; Rehang Wardrobe Door: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $420.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $240.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5343960?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5343960?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13078795-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5343960 — Property damage

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5343960 — net $10,942.31 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears as of date of eviction	$420.00	Rent arrears as of date of eviction
Previous Tribunal Order (5304251	$3,118.00	Previous Tribunal Order (5304251
Rubbish removal	$240.00	Rubbish removal
Cleaning	$730.00	Cleaning
Carpet Cleaning	$448.50	Carpet Cleaning
Internal door replacement	$1,050.00	Internal door replacement
Exterior door replacement	$855.87	Exterior door replacement
Lock/key replacement	$227.00	Lock/key replacement
Rehang wardrobe door	$100.00	Rehang wardrobe door
Bedroom door handle replacement	$97.00	Bedroom door handle replacement
Door jamb repair	$410.00	Door jamb repair
Door painting	$987.96	Door painting
Internal wall repairs and painting	$1,389.98	Internal wall repairs and painting
Loss of rent during repairs	$840.00	Loss of rent during repairs
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$10,942.31
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$10,942.31

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlords name and identifying details.
Monique Zaire Takarangi-Edwards and Giuseppe Maresca must pay [The landlord/s] $10,942.31 immediately, calculated as shown in table below. DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears as of date of eviction$420.00 Previous Tribunal Order (5304251)$3,118.00 Rubbish removal$240.00 Cleaning$730.00 Carpet Cleaning$448.50 Internal door replacement$1,050.00 Exterior door replacement$855.87 Lock/key replacement$227.00 Rehang wardrobe door$100.00 Bedroom door handle replacement$97.00 Door jamb repair$410.00 Door painting$987.96 Internal wall repairs and painting$1,389.98 Loss of rent during repairs$840.00 Filing fee reimbursement$28.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$10,942.31
This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 29 August 2025 under application 5304251

Reasons

The Tribunal must consider an application filed by the landlord against the tenant and guarantor.
Only the landlord appeared at the hearing today. I am satisfied that the tenant and guarantor has been properly notified of the hearing, and therefore, I will proceed to consider the claim in their absence. I note there has been a previous hearing in relation to this tenancy, and the respondents did not engage in that hearing either.

BACKGROUND

The tenancy agreement records that Monique Zaire Takarangi-Edwards as the tenant, and Giuseppe Maresca the guarantor
The tenancy was terminated by order of the Tribunal because of rent arrears. Possession of the premises was to returned to the landlord on 1 September 2025. The tenant did not leave the premises as ordered, so was evicted on 8 September 2025. The landlord reports that tenant belongings remained in the tenancy that needed to be removed, and further that I on taking possession, that they found a range of damage and cleaning necessary. Those matters are the subject of this order.

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.
It is the applicant that must prove their case. As noted by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: ... [L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.

ANALYSIS

The landlord’s claims fall into three categories, those are: a. Loss of rent b. Compensation for damage to the premises c. Cleaning and rubbish removal d. Inclusion of the previous Tribunal order.
I will consider each category in turn. Claim 1 – Loss of rent
Noting that the Tribunal had previously ordered rent arrears up until 1 September 2025, the landlord seeks a further week of rent to cover the period until the eviction occurred. The tenant is liable to pay rent while they hold possession of the premises. This claim is established and ordered in full.
The landlord has also claimed two weeks of additional rent, while the tenants’ belongings were in the house, and for some of the time, the house could not be rented because of the ongoing repairs (which took about four weeks). Here the landlord is only claiming two weeks of lost rent. That is fair and ordered in full. Claim 2 - Damage
The landlord has claimed a range of damage repairs for the premises, and has provided invoices from the builder in support of this claim.
With any compensation claim, to receive an order, the party 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.
Taking into consideration the work set out on the invoice, I find as follows: a. Internal door replacement – the photographs confirm confirmed that a number of internal door doors have been significantly damaged, where the panels are split or indented. I accept that the damage was not amenable to repair, and that replacement of the doors was necessary. The landlord has claimed $1,050.00 for those repairs. b. External door replacement – the photograph supports that there has been extensive damage to the exterior door. Glass is broken, and the door and frame damaged. The landlord has claimed $855.87 for the repair. c. Lock replacement – as part of the damage to the front door, the lock has required replacement, the landlord claims $227.00 for that repair. d. Rehang wardrobe door – the evidence is that the wardrobe door had been removed, and required reinstallation, the claimed cost being $100.00. e. Bedroom door handle replacement – the evidence is that the bedroom door handle was damaged. During the tenancy, the landlord claims $97.00 for the repair. f. Door jamb repair – the evidence is that an interior door jamb has been split, the photograph is consistent with the door having been forced open, causing damage to the jamb. The landlord’s claim is $410.00 for the repair. g. Door painting – the landlord has claimed $987.96, to paint the new internal doors that have been installed. h. Internal wall repairs and painting – The landlord claims $1,389.98 to repair internal walls, and paint them. The evidence favour is a conclusion that the interior walls have been damaged during the tenancy, which has required plaster and preparation, and repainting.
Having taken into account the available evidence, particularly the photographs, I am satisfied that all of the above work was required to address damage that arose during the tenancy, and damage beyond fair wear and tear. The tenant has not proven that the damages were anything other than careless or intentional damage. I consider that the majority of the damage would be intentional damage, given its nature. I find the landlord’s damage repair claim has been established in full. Claim 3 – House cleaning and rubbish removal
The landlord’s position is that the premises were not returned reasonably clean and tidy, and there was rubbish left on the premises. The landlord claims house cleaning of $730.00 and rubbish removal of $240.00, and carpet cleaning of $448.50.
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.
It is important to note that the RTA does not require the premises to be provided/returned in an immaculate condition, only in a reasonably clean and tidy state. There is no scientific way to determine what is ‘reasonably’ clean and tidy, what is required is for the Tribunal to evaluate the evidence available (particularly photographs presented), and then to determine whether the premises would be reasonably clean.
The photographs provided show extensive rubbish and belongings in the premises, which were far from a clean and tidy standard. I accept that carpet cleaning was necessary. This claim seems reasonable given the photographs and is ordered in full. Claim 4 – Inclusion of previous order
On 29 August 2025, the Tribunal issued an order which terminated the tenancy because of rent arrears, and also ordered that rent arrears be paid as well as the filing fee. Once the bond was deducted from the amount owed, that left the tenant owing the landlord $3,118.00.
The landlord reports that the order has not been complied with, and that no further money has been paid by the tenant. It is sensible that the earlier order be combined with this current order, so that for enforcement purposes, it is only this order that is enforced.

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 seeks name suppression, which is ordered as the landlord has been entirely successful.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5343960 — net $10,942.31 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears as of date of eviction	$420.00	Rent arrears as of date of eviction
Previous Tribunal Order (5304251	$3,118.00	Previous Tribunal Order (5304251
Rubbish removal	$240.00	Rubbish removal
Cleaning	$730.00	Cleaning
Carpet Cleaning	$448.50	Carpet Cleaning
Internal door replacement	$1,050.00	Internal door replacement
Exterior door replacement	$855.87	Exterior door replacement
Lock/key replacement	$227.00	Lock/key replacement
Rehang wardrobe door	$100.00	Rehang wardrobe door
Bedroom door handle replacement	$97.00	Bedroom door handle replacement
Door jamb repair	$410.00	Door jamb repair
Door painting	$987.96	Door painting
Internal wall repairs and painting	$1,389.98	Internal wall repairs and painting
Loss of rent during repairs	$840.00	Loss of rent during repairs
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$10,942.31
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$10,942.31

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlords name and identifying details.
Monique Zaire Takarangi-Edwards and Giuseppe Maresca must pay [The landlord/s] $10,942.31 immediately, calculated as shown in table below. DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears as of date of eviction$420.00 Previous Tribunal Order (5304251)$3,118.00 Rubbish removal$240.00 Cleaning$730.00 Carpet Cleaning$448.50 Internal door replacement$1,050.00 Exterior door replacement$855.87 Lock/key replacement$227.00 Rehang wardrobe door$100.00 Bedroom door handle replacement$97.00 Door jamb repair$410.00 Door painting$987.96 Internal wall repairs and painting$1,389.98 Loss of rent during repairs$840.00 Filing fee reimbursement$28.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$10,942.31
This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 29 August 2025 under application 5304251

Reasons

The Tribunal must consider an application filed by the landlord against the tenant and guarantor.
Only the landlord appeared at the hearing today. I am satisfied that the tenant and guarantor has been properly notified of the hearing, and therefore, I will proceed to consider the claim in their absence. I note there has been a previous hearing in relation to this tenancy, and the respondents did not engage in that hearing either.

BACKGROUND

The tenancy agreement records that Monique Zaire Takarangi-Edwards as the tenant, and Giuseppe Maresca the guarantor
The tenancy was terminated by order of the Tribunal because of rent arrears. Possession of the premises was to returned to the landlord on 1 September 2025. The tenant did not leave the premises as ordered, so was evicted on 8 September 2025. The landlord reports that tenant belongings remained in the tenancy that needed to be removed, and further that I on taking possession, that they found a range of damage and cleaning necessary. Those matters are the subject of this order.

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.
It is the applicant that must prove their case. As noted by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: ... [L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.

ANALYSIS

The landlord’s claims fall into three categories, those are: a. Loss of rent b. Compensation for damage to the premises c. Cleaning and rubbish removal d. Inclusion of the previous Tribunal order.
I will consider each category in turn. Claim 1 – Loss of rent
Noting that the Tribunal had previously ordered rent arrears up until 1 September 2025, the landlord seeks a further week of rent to cover the period until the eviction occurred. The tenant is liable to pay rent while they hold possession of the premises. This claim is established and ordered in full.
The landlord has also claimed two weeks of additional rent, while the tenants’ belongings were in the house, and for some of the time, the house could not be rented because of the ongoing repairs (which took about four weeks). Here the landlord is only claiming two weeks of lost rent. That is fair and ordered in full. Claim 2 - Damage
The landlord has claimed a range of damage repairs for the premises, and has provided invoices from the builder in support of this claim.
With any compensation claim, to receive an order, the party 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.
Taking into consideration the work set out on the invoice, I find as follows: a. Internal door replacement – the photographs confirm confirmed that a number of internal door doors have been significantly damaged, where the panels are split or indented. I accept that the damage was not amenable to repair, and that replacement of the doors was necessary. The landlord has claimed $1,050.00 for those repairs. b. External door replacement – the photograph supports that there has been extensive damage to the exterior door. Glass is broken, and the door and frame damaged. The landlord has claimed $855.87 for the repair. c. Lock replacement – as part of the damage to the front door, the lock has required replacement, the landlord claims $227.00 for that repair. d. Rehang wardrobe door – the evidence is that the wardrobe door had been removed, and required reinstallation, the claimed cost being $100.00. e. Bedroom door handle replacement – the evidence is that the bedroom door handle was damaged. During the tenancy, the landlord claims $97.00 for the repair. f. Door jamb repair – the evidence is that an interior door jamb has been split, the photograph is consistent with the door having been forced open, causing damage to the jamb. The landlord’s claim is $410.00 for the repair. g. Door painting – the landlord has claimed $987.96, to paint the new internal doors that have been installed. h. Internal wall repairs and painting – The landlord claims $1,389.98 to repair internal walls, and paint them. The evidence favour is a conclusion that the interior walls have been damaged during the tenancy, which has required plaster and preparation, and repainting.
Having taken into account the available evidence, particularly the photographs, I am satisfied that all of the above work was required to address damage that arose during the tenancy, and damage beyond fair wear and tear. The tenant has not proven that the damages were anything other than careless or intentional damage. I consider that the majority of the damage would be intentional damage, given its nature. I find the landlord’s damage repair claim has been established in full. Claim 3 – House cleaning and rubbish removal
The landlord’s position is that the premises were not returned reasonably clean and tidy, and there was rubbish left on the premises. The landlord claims house cleaning of $730.00 and rubbish removal of $240.00, and carpet cleaning of $448.50.
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.
It is important to note that the RTA does not require the premises to be provided/returned in an immaculate condition, only in a reasonably clean and tidy state. There is no scientific way to determine what is ‘reasonably’ clean and tidy, what is required is for the Tribunal to evaluate the evidence available (particularly photographs presented), and then to determine whether the premises would be reasonably clean.
The photographs provided show extensive rubbish and belongings in the premises, which were far from a clean and tidy standard. I accept that carpet cleaning was necessary. This claim seems reasonable given the photographs and is ordered in full. Claim 4 – Inclusion of previous order
On 29 August 2025, the Tribunal issued an order which terminated the tenancy because of rent arrears, and also ordered that rent arrears be paid as well as the filing fee. Once the bond was deducted from the amount owed, that left the tenant owing the landlord $3,118.00.
The landlord reports that the order has not been complied with, and that no further money has been paid by the tenant. It is sensible that the earlier order be combined with this current order, so that for enforcement purposes, it is only this order that is enforced.

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 seeks name suppression, which is ordered as the landlord has been entirely successful.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5343960 — Property damage

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5343960 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

BACKGROUND

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

ANALYSIS

NAME SUPPRESSION

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

BACKGROUND

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

ANALYSIS

NAME SUPPRESSION

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions