Published tribunal order
Tenancy Tribunal case 5361644 — Property damage
Decided 9 Jul 2026 · Published 9 Jul 2026 · Application 5361644
- Property damage
Party names are redacted in the official published order.
Order
- An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
- [The tenant/s] must pay [The landlord/s] $2,729.11 immediately, calculated as shown in table below. DescriptionLandlord Water rates to end of tenancy$224.00 Lock/key replacement$271.51 Repairs: Painting insurance excess x1$1,150.00 Repairs: Laundry door$816.88 Window repairs$340.00 Filing fee reimbursement$28.00 Total award$3,609.11 Minus Bond$880.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$1,950.39
- [The tenant/s] must pay [The property management company] $778.72 immediately as compensation for rubbish removal costs.
- The application for carpet replacement is dismissed.
Reasons
- Only [The landlord/s] attended the hearing which took place by videoconference.
- The landlord has applied for water rates, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
- This hearing was adjourned on 10 March 2026 for the landlord to provide an updated schedule of further claims within 28 days. As this was not provided the claims are limited, as directed, to the claims listed in the original application being bond refund, water rates, locks, rubbish removal, painting, laundry door replacement, carpet replacement, glass repairs and reimbursement of filing fee.
How much is owed for water rates?
- The tenancy ended on 4 July 2025. The landlord provided water rates records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy for excess water used by the tenant.
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 did not remove all rubbish at the end of the tenancy. The landlord provided exit inspection photographs and advised that the invoice from [Rubbish remover] in the sum of $778.72 for rubbish removal was paid by the agent company so the tenant is ordered to reimburse this to [The property management company].
- The tenant did not return the keys and the lock for one of the doors was completely removed. The landlord provided an invoice for the lock/key replacement and the tenant is ordered to reimburse this to the landlord.
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 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 claimed the following damage was caused during the tenancy: (a)Damage to paintwork – the landlord claimed that the tenant damaged the paintwork during the tenancy as there were holes in the walls. At the end of the tenancy the tenant sought to repair the damage by patching the holes but as the work was not carefully done the patches were very visible. The landlord provided entry and exit photographs which proved the damage to the walls. I am satisfied that the tenant did not intend to cause the damage but the paint patching work is carelessly done and has caused damage beyond fair wear and tear. The landlord has insurance for this damage and the insurance excess is $1150.00. The tenant is ordered to reimburse the landlord the sum of $1150.00 as this amount is less than four weeks rent. (b)Damage to laundry door – the landlord provided entry and exit inspection photographs showing damage to the laundry door and frame beyond fair wear and tear requiring replacement. The landlord provided a copy of the invoice for the repair in the sum of $816.88. This amount is less than the insurance excess. (c)Damage to carpet – the landlord claimed that the tenant damaged the carpet and it required replacement at the end of the tenancy. The landlord provided entry and exit inspection photographs and the insurance information. The entry photographs show existing damage to the carpet in the lounge at the commencement of the tenancy. Although the exit photographs show further damage at the end of the tenancy I find that the claim is not proved on the balance of probabilities as the carpet was more than 12 years old and there was existing damage at the commencement. Therefore I find that the landlord has not proved on the balance of probabilities that the damage was beyond fair wear and tear having regard to the age of the carpet and it’s condition at the commencement of the tenancy. (d)Glass damage – the landlord claimed that there were two broken windows at the end of the tenancy and one was replaced with plastic and not glass. The landlord provided photographs that proved the damage and invoices for the repairs totalling $340.00. I find that the damage was carelessly caused and is beyond fair wear and tear.
- Because the landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee and suppressed the landlord details in the order as applied for. See sections 102(4) and 95A(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.