What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5350185 about?

The tribunal order states: The Bond Centre is to pay [The tenant/s] landlord/s] $2,733.75 immediately.

How much money was awarded in case 5350185?

Individual award amounts are in the official MoJ PDF. Claim amounts appear on this page when claims and net totals reconcile.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5350185?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5350185?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12702428-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5350185 about?

The tribunal order states: The Bond Centre is to pay [The tenant/s] landlord/s] $2,733.75 immediately.

How much money was awarded in case 5350185?

Individual award amounts are in the official MoJ PDF. Claim amounts appear on this page when claims and net totals reconcile.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5350185?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5350185?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12702428-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

36 St Andrews Drive, Tokoroa, Tokoroa 3420 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5350185 — Property damage

Order

The Bond Centre is to pay [The tenant/s] landlord/s] $2,733.75 immediately.
[The tenant/s] tenant/s] to pay [The tenant/s] landlord/s] $2,733.75, calculated as follows: DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears$1,475.00 Rubbish removal$416.30 Cleaning$473.25 Lawn mowing$120.00 Carpet cleaning$200.00 Lock replacement$300.00 Wall repairs (plastering and painting)$1,021.20 Carpet repairs (stains and patching)$1,000.00 Filing fee reimbursement$28.00 Total award$5,033.75 Bond-$2,300.00 Total payable by tenant to landlord$2,733.75

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The Landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation for damage, cleaning and rubbish removal costs, refund of the bond ($2,300.00), and reimbursement of the filing fee ($28.00) following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 26 August 2025. The landlord provided rent records which prove that $1,475.00 remained owing in rent at the end of the tenancy. This amount is accepted and ordered.

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 (s 40(1)(ca)) and to replace standard light bulbs.
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
The landlord produced photographs showing substantial quantities of rubbish left at the premises following the tenancy. The property had been newly renovated and was in a clean condition at the start of the tenancy. The landlord’s evidence of trailer loads and dump fees is accepted. I am satisfied that $416.30 for rubbish removal (comprising $176.30 dump fees plus three hours’ labour at $80/hour) is reasonable.
The landlord’s evidence shows the kitchen cabinetry and oven required cleaning; walls and bathroom surfaces had extensive marks, soap scum, mildew, and mould. The premises were newly renovated. The cleaning invoice for $473.25 is reasonable and accepted.
The lawns were knee-height at the end of the tenancy on an 850 sqm section. The landlord undertook mowing at a cost of $120.00, which is reasonable and allowed.
Professional carpet cleaning at the end of the tenancy was also required. The invoice for $200.00 is accepted.
The tenant did not return the keys, requiring the replacement of locks.
The landlord’s evidence confirms both the garage and entry locks needed to be replaced for security reasons. The claim of $300.00 for new locks is accepted.

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 that date, it 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. See section 49B(3)(a) RTA.
Where the damage is careless and is not covered by insurance, the tenant’s liability is limited to four weeks’ rent. See section 49B(3)(b) RTA.
Tenants are fully liable for intentional damage. See section 49B(1) RTA.
Damage is intentional where a person intends to cause damage or acts knowing that damage is certain. See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.
The following damage occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear:
Holes in walls – $400.00: Three major holes (one in lounge, two in bedroom), consistent with deliberate force. The premises were newly renovated and the entry inspection recorded no damage. Photographs confirm the holes and extensive scuffing, dents and dings. The Landlord claimed $560.00 for plastering against a total cost of $1,021.20 (plastering and painting). The house was newly renovated, painted and carpeted at the start of the tenancy, before the tenant moved in. The painting is not unreasonable considering the damage after only a year of occupancy. I approve $1,021.20 for plastering and painting.
Carpet damage – $1,000.00: The carpet was brand new at commencement. The landlord’s photographs show close to twenty pigmented stains that could not be removed by professional cleaning. A full replacement quote was $5,700.00, but the landlord seeks only $1,000.00 for realistic patch repairs. The claim is reasonable and proved. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for it.
I have taken into account 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.
Because the Landlord has substantially succeeded with it claim, I order reimbursement of its filing fee.

Order

The Bond Centre is to pay [The tenant/s] landlord/s] $2,733.75 immediately.
[The tenant/s] tenant/s] to pay [The tenant/s] landlord/s] $2,733.75, calculated as follows: DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears$1,475.00 Rubbish removal$416.30 Cleaning$473.25 Lawn mowing$120.00 Carpet cleaning$200.00 Lock replacement$300.00 Wall repairs (plastering and painting)$1,021.20 Carpet repairs (stains and patching)$1,000.00 Filing fee reimbursement$28.00 Total award$5,033.75 Bond-$2,300.00 Total payable by tenant to landlord$2,733.75

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The Landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation for damage, cleaning and rubbish removal costs, refund of the bond ($2,300.00), and reimbursement of the filing fee ($28.00) following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 26 August 2025. The landlord provided rent records which prove that $1,475.00 remained owing in rent at the end of the tenancy. This amount is accepted and ordered.

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 (s 40(1)(ca)) and to replace standard light bulbs.
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
The landlord produced photographs showing substantial quantities of rubbish left at the premises following the tenancy. The property had been newly renovated and was in a clean condition at the start of the tenancy. The landlord’s evidence of trailer loads and dump fees is accepted. I am satisfied that $416.30 for rubbish removal (comprising $176.30 dump fees plus three hours’ labour at $80/hour) is reasonable.
The landlord’s evidence shows the kitchen cabinetry and oven required cleaning; walls and bathroom surfaces had extensive marks, soap scum, mildew, and mould. The premises were newly renovated. The cleaning invoice for $473.25 is reasonable and accepted.
The lawns were knee-height at the end of the tenancy on an 850 sqm section. The landlord undertook mowing at a cost of $120.00, which is reasonable and allowed.
Professional carpet cleaning at the end of the tenancy was also required. The invoice for $200.00 is accepted.
The tenant did not return the keys, requiring the replacement of locks.
The landlord’s evidence confirms both the garage and entry locks needed to be replaced for security reasons. The claim of $300.00 for new locks is accepted.

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 that date, it 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. See section 49B(3)(a) RTA.
Where the damage is careless and is not covered by insurance, the tenant’s liability is limited to four weeks’ rent. See section 49B(3)(b) RTA.
Tenants are fully liable for intentional damage. See section 49B(1) RTA.
Damage is intentional where a person intends to cause damage or acts knowing that damage is certain. See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.
The following damage occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear:
Holes in walls – $400.00: Three major holes (one in lounge, two in bedroom), consistent with deliberate force. The premises were newly renovated and the entry inspection recorded no damage. Photographs confirm the holes and extensive scuffing, dents and dings. The Landlord claimed $560.00 for plastering against a total cost of $1,021.20 (plastering and painting). The house was newly renovated, painted and carpeted at the start of the tenancy, before the tenant moved in. The painting is not unreasonable considering the damage after only a year of occupancy. I approve $1,021.20 for plastering and painting.
Carpet damage – $1,000.00: The carpet was brand new at commencement. The landlord’s photographs show close to twenty pigmented stains that could not be removed by professional cleaning. A full replacement quote was $5,700.00, but the landlord seeks only $1,000.00 for realistic patch repairs. The claim is reasonable and proved. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for it.
I have taken into account 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.
Because the Landlord has substantially succeeded with it claim, I order reimbursement of its filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5350185 — Property damage at 36 St Andrews Drive, Tokoroa, Tokoroa 3420

Tenancy Tribunal case 5350185 — Property damage at 36 St Andrews Drive, Tokoroa, Tokoroa 3420

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.