How much money was awarded in case 5344389?

Cleaning: $97.75 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $186.87 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5344389?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5344389?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13232958-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5344389?

Cleaning: $97.75 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $186.87 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5344389?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5344389?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13232958-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

145 Hutchinson Avenue, New Lynn, Auckland 0600 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5344389 — Cleanliness

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5344389 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 5344389 — net $284.62 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Carpet Cleaning	$97.75	Carpet Cleaning
Cleaning	$186.87	Cleaning
Net award	$284.62
Bond	$2,800.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$284.62

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

[The tenant/s] to pay [The landlord/s] $284.62 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,800.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: [The landlord/s]: $284.62 [The tenant/s]: $2,515.38

The tenant’s claim for compensation and the landlord’s claim in respect of curtain cleaning are dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

The tenancy commenced on 12 March 2025 and ended on 29 July 2025.

The tenant applied for refund of the bond and compensation.

The landlord applied for vacated costs and refund of the bond.

The parties had an order 1 from the Tribunal early in the tenancy due to the landlord not providing the premises in a reasonable state of cleanliness. The Tribunal ordered compensation to the tenant in respect of this. Tenant’s application

The tenants seek compensation for the delay taken by the landlord in advising of issues relating to the cleanliness of the premises at the end of the tenancy.

The landlord took photographs of the tenancy on the same day as the tenants vacated. The exit inspection report is dated 30 July 2025. The landlord provided the tenants with the exit inspection report on 8 August 2025.

On 6 August 2025 the landlord provided the tenants with a list of issues following the end of the tenancy. Those issues were cleaning, carpet stain removal and curtain mould removal. The landlord did not provide the tenant with any invoices prior to their application to the Tribunal.

The tenant considers that the landlord should have communicated better and provided them with an opportunity to address any issues.

While I accept that the landlord could have communicated better, including providing the tenants with a copy of any invoices, there is no requirement for a landlord to provide tenants with an opportunity to go back to the premises to carry out further cleaning.

In relation to the claim for compensation there is no evidence that the tenant suffered any actual loss or disadvantage because of the delay. However, I would suggest that the landlord consider improving their communication with tenants in future. The claim for compensation is dismissed.

The tenants have applied for refund of the bond. The bond is released after taking account of the awards to the landlord. Landlord application 1 TT5208574

The landlord has applied for compensation for costs relating to the end of the tenancy. Those costs are cleaning of $373.75, carpet stain removal of $97.75 and curtain cleaning of $207.00.

The landlord produced an exit inspection report with photographs showing that some areas of the premises was not left in a reasonably clean and tidy condition. I refer to dusty skirting boards, dirty door and window frames, a dirty rangehood, unclean shower and taps and unclean drawer.

The tenants state that some areas were not cleaned at the end of the tenancy because they were not in a clean state at the beginning of the tenancy. The Act does not allow for the tenants to avoid cleaning parts that were not cleaned at the beginning. The Tribunal has dealt with the issue of the landlord’s failure to provide the premises in a clean and tidy condition at the commencement.

I am satisfied that some cleaning was required. The invoice produced by the landlord includes areas that are not referred to in the inspection report and are therefore outside the claim for what the tenant’s should be responsible for. For this reason, I have reduced the invoice by half and that is the amount awarded to the landlord for cleaning.

The landlord produced photographs of the carpet staining from after the tenancy ended and photographs of the same area from before the tenancy started. I am satisfied that these tenants caused the staining of the carpet, and that cleaning of the carpet was required. The amount claimed is awarded.

In relation to the curtain cleaning the landlord did not provide an invoice and instead only a quote because the cleaning has not been carried out. This means that there has been no loss to the landlord. I also note that a search of the premises online shows that it is currently on the market for sale, and it appears from the listing photographs that the curtains have been replaced.

The landlord’s claim for curtain cleaning is dismissed.

As both parties have had some success with their application, I make no award for reimbursement of the filing fee. For the same reason I order suppression of the parties names.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5344389 — net $284.62 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Carpet Cleaning	$97.75	Carpet Cleaning
Cleaning	$186.87	Cleaning
Net award	$284.62
Bond	$2,800.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$284.62

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant and Landlord name and identifying details.
[The tenant/s] to pay [The landlord/s] $284.62 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,800.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: [The landlord/s]: $284.62 [The tenant/s]: $2,515.38

The tenant’s claim for compensation and the landlord’s claim in respect of curtain cleaning are dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenancy commenced on 12 March 2025 and ended on 29 July 2025.
The tenant applied for refund of the bond and compensation.
The landlord applied for vacated costs and refund of the bond.
The parties had an order 1 from the Tribunal early in the tenancy due to the landlord not providing the premises in a reasonable state of cleanliness. The Tribunal ordered compensation to the tenant in respect of this. Tenant’s application
The tenants seek compensation for the delay taken by the landlord in advising of issues relating to the cleanliness of the premises at the end of the tenancy.
The landlord took photographs of the tenancy on the same day as the tenants vacated. The exit inspection report is dated 30 July 2025. The landlord provided the tenants with the exit inspection report on 8 August 2025.
On 6 August 2025 the landlord provided the tenants with a list of issues following the end of the tenancy. Those issues were cleaning, carpet stain removal and curtain mould removal. The landlord did not provide the tenant with any invoices prior to their application to the Tribunal.
The tenant considers that the landlord should have communicated better and provided them with an opportunity to address any issues.
While I accept that the landlord could have communicated better, including providing the tenants with a copy of any invoices, there is no requirement for a landlord to provide tenants with an opportunity to go back to the premises to carry out further cleaning.
In relation to the claim for compensation there is no evidence that the tenant suffered any actual loss or disadvantage because of the delay. However, I would suggest that the landlord consider improving their communication with tenants in future. The claim for compensation is dismissed.
The tenants have applied for refund of the bond. The bond is released after taking account of the awards to the landlord. Landlord application 1 TT5208574
The landlord has applied for compensation for costs relating to the end of the tenancy. Those costs are cleaning of $373.75, carpet stain removal of $97.75 and curtain cleaning of $207.00.
The landlord produced an exit inspection report with photographs showing that some areas of the premises was not left in a reasonably clean and tidy condition. I refer to dusty skirting boards, dirty door and window frames, a dirty rangehood, unclean shower and taps and unclean drawer.
The tenants state that some areas were not cleaned at the end of the tenancy because they were not in a clean state at the beginning of the tenancy. The Act does not allow for the tenants to avoid cleaning parts that were not cleaned at the beginning. The Tribunal has dealt with the issue of the landlord’s failure to provide the premises in a clean and tidy condition at the commencement.
I am satisfied that some cleaning was required. The invoice produced by the landlord includes areas that are not referred to in the inspection report and are therefore outside the claim for what the tenant’s should be responsible for. For this reason, I have reduced the invoice by half and that is the amount awarded to the landlord for cleaning.
The landlord produced photographs of the carpet staining from after the tenancy ended and photographs of the same area from before the tenancy started. I am satisfied that these tenants caused the staining of the carpet, and that cleaning of the carpet was required. The amount claimed is awarded.
In relation to the curtain cleaning the landlord did not provide an invoice and instead only a quote because the cleaning has not been carried out. This means that there has been no loss to the landlord. I also note that a search of the premises online shows that it is currently on the market for sale, and it appears from the listing photographs that the curtains have been replaced.
The landlord’s claim for curtain cleaning is dismissed.
As both parties have had some success with their application, I make no award for reimbursement of the filing fee. For the same reason I order suppression of the parties names.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5344389 — Cleanliness at 145 Hutchinson Avenue, New Lynn, Auckland 0600

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5344389 — Cleanliness at 145 Hutchinson Avenue, New Lynn, Auckland 0600

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Key findings

Frequently asked questions