What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5358818 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 5358818?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $385.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $458.91 awarded to landlord; Replace Garage Door And Motor: $2,119.68 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $2,800.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $587.80 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5358818?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5358818?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13014141-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5358818 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 5358818?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $385.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $458.91 awarded to landlord; Replace Garage Door And Motor: $2,119.68 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $2,800.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $587.80 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5358818?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5358818?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13014141-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5358818 — Property damage

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5358818 — net $6,027.39 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Water rates: to 19.6.2025	$587.80	Water rates: to 19.6.2025
Repairs: replace garage door and motor	$2,119.68	Repairs: replace garage door and motor
Rubbish removal	$2,800.00	Rubbish removal
Window repairs	$458.91	Window repairs
Lawns and Garden work	$385.00	Lawns and Garden work
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$6,027.39
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$6,027.39

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the parties’ names and identifying details and the tenancy address.
Deliah Manuel must pay [The landlord/s] $6,027.39 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $352.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

[The landlord’s representatives], representing the landlord, attended the video conference hearing. The phone number for the tenant, the last three digits being 972, was called twice without any response. As the tenant was served, the hearing proceeded in her absence.
The landlord has applied for outgoings, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The landlord said the tenancy ended on 23 July 2025.

How much is owed for water rates?

The landlord provided water rates invoices and a ledger, which prove the amount owing for water rates up to 19 June 2025, which is $587.80.

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. Rubbish removal
The landlord said the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. The landlord provided a Final Inspection Report (End of Tenancy Report) dated 24 July 2025 with photographs showing the condition of the property at the end of the tenancy. The landlord also provided an Entry Inspection Report dated 14 June 2024 with photographs of the condition of the property just before the tenancy began.
The landlord claimed $2,800.00 for rubbish removal and provided an invoice for this work in this amount. The landlord said that they had incurred a further cost of $1,800.00 and skip bin hire also for rubbish removal for this property but were only claiming $2,800.00 from the tenant for this work.
The landlord pointed to numerous photographs in their Final Inspection Report with piles of rubbish throughout almost every room in the property, which included 6 couches, 3 large armchairs, 9 mattresses, food, pots, pans, rubbish bags full of clothing and other rubbish, shelving, lowboy cabinet, vacuum cleaner, cleaning products, bed bases, old carpets, rugs and mats, a large trampoline, large door-sized piece of glass, timber fencing panels and piles of other miscellaneous items and rubbish both inside and outside of the property.
Given the significant number of large items and the overall amount of rubbish shown in the photographs provided by the landlord, I find the landlord’s claim for $2,800.00 to be reasonable. Therefore, I award the landlord $2,800.00 for rubbish removal at the end of the tenancy. Lawns and garden work
The landlord also claimed $385.00 for lawn and garden work at the end of the tenancy and provided an invoice in this amount for this work. The landlord pointed to several photographs in their Final Inspection Report showing high weeds and overgrown lawns all around the property and up the sides of the driveway, that needed to be weeded, lawns mown and the garden waste removed. Given the evidence provided, I find the landlord’s claim reasonable and so award the landlord $385.00 for lawns and garden work at the end of the tenancy.
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 landlord said the following damage was caused during the tenancy: Window repairs a. Two windows were broken which had to be replaced. The landlord pointed to photographs in their Final Inspection Report showing a crack through the lounge ranch slider door and another showing a crack in a window in bedroom 2. The landlord explained that the lounge ranch slider door had to have safety glass put in, given it was a door and needed to be secure. The landlord provided an invoice in the amount of $458.91 for reglazing these two windows. I note that only the glass was replaced, according to the landlord and the invoice provided, not the window frames. b. From the photographs, I find the damage caused to the two windows is likely careless damage on the part of the tenant. As such, the tenant is liable for the cost, bearing in mind depreciation and the section 49B RTA cap. c. As the windows were only reglazed and no work was required on the window frames, I do not consider depreciation. d. The landlord said the insurance excess, as confirmed in the tenancy agreement, is $10,000.00. Therefore, the amount of the invoice for reglazing the windows, $458.91, is less than the insurance excess. Therefore, I award the landlord $458.91 to reglaze the two windows at the end of the tenancy. Garage door e. The landlord also said the tenant damaged the garage door, which had come off its rollers, had dents all over it and a hole. The landlord said it came off the tracks and bent the rail, which then damaged the motor, so both the garage door and the motor had to be replaced. The landlord pointed to before and after photographs of the garage door. The garage door, in the photographs at the end of the tenancy, was clearly bent and had come off the tracks. The landlord said, given the holes and dents in the garage door, it looked like somebody had attacked the door with a machete. The landlord explained that the property was known for drug use, and pointed to photographs in their Final Inspection Report showing drug paraphernalia. f. Given the evidence provided, I find the damage done to the garage door and motor to be intentional damage on the part of the tenant. As such, the tenant is liable for the full cost of repair minus any depreciation. The cap in section 49B RTA does not apply here. g. The landlord provided an invoice for the replacement of the garage door and motor and removal of the old garage door and motor, in the amount of $3,532.80, which I find is a reasonable cost for this work, before depreciation. h. In determining the compensation payable, depreciation must be taken into account. Depreciation is linked to the concept of betterment. Everything is subject to wear and tear and will need to be replaced in time. Where an item has to be replaced as a result of tenant damage, this hastens the process. If the damaged item is replaced with a ‘better’ item, compensation is adjusted to reflect that. A landlord should not be placed in a better position following a claim in the Tribunal than the landlord would have been if the damage had not occurred. i. The landlord estimated that the garage door was around 8 years old before replacement. Current depreciation guidelines estimate garage doors in residential properties to last around 20 years. As such, I deduct the $3,532.80 cost that I find reasonable by 40% for depreciation to an award of $2,119.68.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved. Filing fee
Because [The landlord/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee. Refund of the bond
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $352.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately. Suppression
The landlord requested name suppression and is granted name suppression as they have been successful with the claim. Therefore, I order that the landlord’s name and identifying details and the tenancy address are not to be published. See section 95A(1) RTA.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5358818 — net $6,027.39 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Water rates: to 19.6.2025	$587.80	Water rates: to 19.6.2025
Repairs: replace garage door and motor	$2,119.68	Repairs: replace garage door and motor
Rubbish removal	$2,800.00	Rubbish removal
Window repairs	$458.91	Window repairs
Lawns and Garden work	$385.00	Lawns and Garden work
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$6,027.39
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$6,027.39

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the parties’ names and identifying details and the tenancy address.
Deliah Manuel must pay [The landlord/s] $6,027.39 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $352.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

[The landlord’s representatives], representing the landlord, attended the video conference hearing. The phone number for the tenant, the last three digits being 972, was called twice without any response. As the tenant was served, the hearing proceeded in her absence.
The landlord has applied for outgoings, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The landlord said the tenancy ended on 23 July 2025.

How much is owed for water rates?

The landlord provided water rates invoices and a ledger, which prove the amount owing for water rates up to 19 June 2025, which is $587.80.

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. Rubbish removal
The landlord said the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. The landlord provided a Final Inspection Report (End of Tenancy Report) dated 24 July 2025 with photographs showing the condition of the property at the end of the tenancy. The landlord also provided an Entry Inspection Report dated 14 June 2024 with photographs of the condition of the property just before the tenancy began.
The landlord claimed $2,800.00 for rubbish removal and provided an invoice for this work in this amount. The landlord said that they had incurred a further cost of $1,800.00 and skip bin hire also for rubbish removal for this property but were only claiming $2,800.00 from the tenant for this work.
The landlord pointed to numerous photographs in their Final Inspection Report with piles of rubbish throughout almost every room in the property, which included 6 couches, 3 large armchairs, 9 mattresses, food, pots, pans, rubbish bags full of clothing and other rubbish, shelving, lowboy cabinet, vacuum cleaner, cleaning products, bed bases, old carpets, rugs and mats, a large trampoline, large door-sized piece of glass, timber fencing panels and piles of other miscellaneous items and rubbish both inside and outside of the property.
Given the significant number of large items and the overall amount of rubbish shown in the photographs provided by the landlord, I find the landlord’s claim for $2,800.00 to be reasonable. Therefore, I award the landlord $2,800.00 for rubbish removal at the end of the tenancy. Lawns and garden work
The landlord also claimed $385.00 for lawn and garden work at the end of the tenancy and provided an invoice in this amount for this work. The landlord pointed to several photographs in their Final Inspection Report showing high weeds and overgrown lawns all around the property and up the sides of the driveway, that needed to be weeded, lawns mown and the garden waste removed. Given the evidence provided, I find the landlord’s claim reasonable and so award the landlord $385.00 for lawns and garden work at the end of the tenancy.
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 landlord said the following damage was caused during the tenancy: Window repairs a. Two windows were broken which had to be replaced. The landlord pointed to photographs in their Final Inspection Report showing a crack through the lounge ranch slider door and another showing a crack in a window in bedroom 2. The landlord explained that the lounge ranch slider door had to have safety glass put in, given it was a door and needed to be secure. The landlord provided an invoice in the amount of $458.91 for reglazing these two windows. I note that only the glass was replaced, according to the landlord and the invoice provided, not the window frames. b. From the photographs, I find the damage caused to the two windows is likely careless damage on the part of the tenant. As such, the tenant is liable for the cost, bearing in mind depreciation and the section 49B RTA cap. c. As the windows were only reglazed and no work was required on the window frames, I do not consider depreciation. d. The landlord said the insurance excess, as confirmed in the tenancy agreement, is $10,000.00. Therefore, the amount of the invoice for reglazing the windows, $458.91, is less than the insurance excess. Therefore, I award the landlord $458.91 to reglaze the two windows at the end of the tenancy. Garage door e. The landlord also said the tenant damaged the garage door, which had come off its rollers, had dents all over it and a hole. The landlord said it came off the tracks and bent the rail, which then damaged the motor, so both the garage door and the motor had to be replaced. The landlord pointed to before and after photographs of the garage door. The garage door, in the photographs at the end of the tenancy, was clearly bent and had come off the tracks. The landlord said, given the holes and dents in the garage door, it looked like somebody had attacked the door with a machete. The landlord explained that the property was known for drug use, and pointed to photographs in their Final Inspection Report showing drug paraphernalia. f. Given the evidence provided, I find the damage done to the garage door and motor to be intentional damage on the part of the tenant. As such, the tenant is liable for the full cost of repair minus any depreciation. The cap in section 49B RTA does not apply here. g. The landlord provided an invoice for the replacement of the garage door and motor and removal of the old garage door and motor, in the amount of $3,532.80, which I find is a reasonable cost for this work, before depreciation. h. In determining the compensation payable, depreciation must be taken into account. Depreciation is linked to the concept of betterment. Everything is subject to wear and tear and will need to be replaced in time. Where an item has to be replaced as a result of tenant damage, this hastens the process. If the damaged item is replaced with a ‘better’ item, compensation is adjusted to reflect that. A landlord should not be placed in a better position following a claim in the Tribunal than the landlord would have been if the damage had not occurred. i. The landlord estimated that the garage door was around 8 years old before replacement. Current depreciation guidelines estimate garage doors in residential properties to last around 20 years. As such, I deduct the $3,532.80 cost that I find reasonable by 40% for depreciation to an award of $2,119.68.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved. Filing fee
Because [The landlord/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee. Refund of the bond
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $352.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately. Suppression
The landlord requested name suppression and is granted name suppression as they have been successful with the claim. Therefore, I order that the landlord’s name and identifying details and the tenancy address are not to be published. See section 95A(1) RTA.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5358818 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5358818 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for water rates?

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

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for water rates?

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