What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5350527 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 5350527?

Cleaning: $1,138.50 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $336.37 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $442.75 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Doors, Walls Floor: $750.00 awarded to landlord; Missing Bunk Bed: $224.25 awarded to landlord; Missing Pet Cage: $25.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $598.40 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5350527?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5350527?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12696360-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5350527 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 5350527?

Cleaning: $1,138.50 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $336.37 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $442.75 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Doors, Walls Floor: $750.00 awarded to landlord; Missing Bunk Bed: $224.25 awarded to landlord; Missing Pet Cage: $25.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $598.40 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5350527?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5350527?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12696360-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5350527 — Cleanliness

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5350527 — net $4,043.27 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning main house	$1,138.50	Cleaning main house
Cleaning self-contained sleep out	$336.37	Cleaning self-contained sleep out
Rubbish removal	$598.40	Rubbish removal
Cleaning: chattels - couch, three mattresses	$442.75	Cleaning: chattels - couch, three mattresses
Repairs: missing bunk bed	$224.25	Repairs: missing bunk bed
Repairs: missing pet cage	$25.00	Repairs: missing pet cage
Repairs: replace damaged dining room chairs	$500.00	Repairs: replace damaged dining room chairs
Repairs: doors, walls floor	$750.00	Repairs: doors, walls floor
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$4,043.27
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,043.27

The tenancy commenced on 17 June 2023 and ended on 29 August 2025. On 5 September 2025, the Tribunal awarded the landlord rent arrears to the end of the tenancy and a refund of the bond. On 23 September 2025, the landlord filed a claim for compensation for cleaning, rubbish removal, missing chattels, and damage. The claim was scheduled for an in-person hearing today, 3 November 2025.

The landlord made a request to join the hearing by telephone. The matter is suitable for a remote hearing and the request was granted. [ Property Manager] has appeared for the landlord. The tenant has been unable to be contacted on the phone numbers provided, nor have they attended in person.

I am satisfied that they have been sent notices of hearing and the matter has proceeded in their absence. I note that they did not appear on the last occasion. It appears that they may have left the country.

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

The property consists of two dwellings: a house with three bedrooms, a bathroom, toilet, kitchen/dining room, lounge, and laundry, and a self-contained sleepout with a kitchen and bathroom. The landlord claims that the tenant has failed to leave the property reasonably clean and tidy and to remove all rubbish.

The property was provided fully furnished. The landlord claims that a couch in the lounge and three of the bed mattresses were not left reasonably clean.

The landlord also claims that two chattels are missing, namely a pet cage and half of one set of bunk beds. Law

At the end of the tenancy the tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, remove all rubbish, and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e)(ii) -(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (Act). Evidence

The landlord has produced a pre-tenancy inspection report, which includes photographs, showing the state of cleanliness of the property at the commencement of the tenancy, as well as the chattels and their condition.

The tenancy agreement allowed the tenant to have a cat and a dog, which they did.

The landlord has provided an end-of-tenancy inspection report, which shows the state of cleanliness of the property and the condition of the chattels at the end of the tenancy.

The landlord states that the pet cage and half of a set of bunk beds were missing. The landlord further states that during an inspection near the end of the tenancy, the tenant advised that the pet cage had fallen apart. However, as it had already been disposed of, no objective assessment could be made by the landlord. The tenant also explained that the missing half of the bunk bed had been sent to the op shop by mistake. Analysis and decision

Having considered the inspection reports and heard from the landlord, I am satisfied that the tenant has failed to leave the property reasonably clean and tidy and to remove all rubbish. I award the compensation sought, which includes disposal and reasonable travel costs.

The photographs show staining and soiling to the couch and mattresses that was not evident at the commencement of the tenancy.

The pre-tenancy inspection reports show that the missing chattels were present at the start of the tenancy.

When awarding compensation for damage and missing chattels, the Tribunal must also consider 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 betterment and depreciation, the Tribunal must consider the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their estimated useful lifespan.

I award the landlord $1,138.50 to clean the house, $336.37 to clean the sleepout, $442.75 to clean the couch and three mattresses, and $598.40 to remove and dispose of the rubbish.

The pet cage was purchased in 2021 for $80.00. Chattels such as this have an estimated useful lifespan of approximately five years. Considering betterment and depreciation, I award the landlord $25.00. The bunk beds were purchased in 2021 for $897.00 and have an estimated useful lifespan of around ten years. Half the bunk bed was missing. Considering betterment and depreciation, I award the landlord $224.25.

Is the tenant responsible for damage to the premises?

The landlord claims the tenant is responsible for damage to walls, doors, the floor, and six dining room chairs which has occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear.

The landlord is claiming $750.00 to repair the damage, and $511.00 to replace the chairs. Law

To succeed with a claim for damage the landlord must prove that damage 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. See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B of the Act.

Fair wear and tear can be described as damage which might reasonably be expected to naturally occur over time, such as the deterioration or gradual wear occurring with everyday use. See Taylor v Webb [1937] 2KB 283 (CA).

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) of the Act.

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) of the Act.

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.

In dealing with the issue of carelessness the question is whether the tenant was exercising a degree of care and attention that a reasonable and prudent tenant would exercise in the circumstances. The test is objective and not based on the subjective opinion of the tenant or landlord.

Awarding compensation the Tribunal must also consider betterment and depreciation. Evidence

The landlord relies on the pre tenancy and post tenancy inspection reports and photographs. Analysis and decision

The Tribunal is in a position to make an objective before-and-after comparison. I am satisfied that the damage claimed occurred during the tenancy and that it is more than fair wear and tear. Although the individual areas of damage are relatively minor, it is widespread. Some of the damage has been partially repaired. I accept the landlord’s submission that the damage to the chairs is consistent with having been scratched by an animal with sharp claws, likely the tenant’s cat.

I award the amount claimed to repair the damage to the walls, doors, and floor, and make no deduction for betterment as only the affected areas were repaired.

Chairs in rental properties have an estimated useful lifespan of approximately ten years. The six chairs were purchased in 2021 for $1,116.00. At the end of the tenancy, the chairs were about halfway through their estimated useful lifespan. I award the landlord $500.00 compensation. Costs

Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. Name suppression

Section 95A of the Act provides that on the application of a party that has been wholly or substantially successful in proceedings, the Tribunal must order that the name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that it is in the public interest to publish the names of the parties, or is justified because of the parties’ conduct, or any other circumstances of the case.

The landlord has been substantially successful in these proceedings, seeks and is granted name suppression.

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5350527 — net $4,043.27 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning main house	$1,138.50	Cleaning main house
Cleaning self-contained sleep out	$336.37	Cleaning self-contained sleep out
Rubbish removal	$598.40	Rubbish removal
Cleaning: chattels - couch, three mattresses	$442.75	Cleaning: chattels - couch, three mattresses
Repairs: missing bunk bed	$224.25	Repairs: missing bunk bed
Repairs: missing pet cage	$25.00	Repairs: missing pet cage
Repairs: replace damaged dining room chairs	$500.00	Repairs: replace damaged dining room chairs
Repairs: doors, walls floor	$750.00	Repairs: doors, walls floor
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$4,043.27
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,043.27