What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5362807 about?

The tribunal order states: The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,070.00 (6520349-001) immediately

How much money was awarded in case 5362807?

Re-Tenanting Costs: $793.50 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $24.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5362807?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Electrical Fittings Replacement/Repair, Water Rates.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5362807?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12886651-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5362807 about?

The tribunal order states: The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,070.00 (6520349-001) immediately

How much money was awarded in case 5362807?

Re-Tenanting Costs: $793.50 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $24.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5362807?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Electrical Fittings Replacement/Repair, Water Rates.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5362807?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12886651-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

30 Whakato Avenue, Kumeu, Kumeu 0810 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5362807 — Cleanliness

Tenantcheck Insights

30 Whakato Avenue, Kumeu, Kumeu 0810 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5362807 — Cleanliness | TenantCheck

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5362807. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Re-tenanting costs	$793.50		Re-tenanting costs
Water rates to 02/10/2025	$24.00		Water rates to 02/10/2025

Claims and awards for application 5362807. Verify on MoJ.

Re-tenanting costs

Amount: $793.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Re-tenanting costs

Water rates to 02/10/2025

Amount: $24.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Water rates to 02/10/2025

Dismissed claims

Property Damage — __________________________________________________________________________________ 53628073 H Ben Fayed 17 December 2025 ______________________________________…

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Water Rates Property damage

Order

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,070.00 (6520349-001) immediately apportioned as follows: Realzea Limited T/A Realzea Property Management: $817.50 [The tenant/s] tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] tenant/s]: $1,252.50

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing by video.
This is a vacated tenancy that was ended early, prior to the conclusion of the fixed term. The applicant seeks $207.00 for cleaning, $793.50 for the costs of re- tenanting the property, $24.00 for water rates, and $977.50 for painting and wall repairs.
The respondent accepts the water costs and the costs of re-tenanting the property. Accordingly, I have not made any assessment of those claims, as they are ordered by consent.
With regard to the cleaning claim, section 40(1)(e)(iii) requires a tenant, at the conclusion of the tenancy, to leave the property in a reasonably clean and tidy state. It does not require the property to be returned in a perfect condition. The exit inspection photos reflect that the property was left in a reasonably clean and tidy state.
I accept the landlord’s evidence that the grooves of the sliding door and the rails could have benefited from further cleaning, and that there was one instance of a cobweb. However, considered in the context of the property as a whole, these matters do not alter my finding that the property was left in a reasonably clean and tidy state. The landlord could reasonably have attended to these minor issues, and the remainder of the items listed on the cleaning invoice were not required. This claim is therefore dismissed.
With regard to the claim for wall repairs, the damage described by the landlord largely appears to consist of scuff marks. The landlord states that the property was new at the commencement of the tenancy. However, a tenant is not required to return the property in a new condition, and fair wear and tear would reasonably be expected after a tenancy of approximately two years. The tenant is therefore not liable for this damage.
The landlord also provided a photograph showing that a wall in one of the rooms is a different colour. The landlord asserts that the tenants repainted this area and did so poorly. Had this been established, part of the cost may have been awardable. However, the tenant denies repainting the wall, and there is no corresponding entry condition report or pre-tenancy inspection photograph demonstrating that the wall was a different colour at the commencement of the tenancy.
As in all civil proceedings, the burden of proof rests with the applicant, who must satisfy the tribunal on the balance of probabilities that the respondent is liable. In this case, the applicant has not discharged that burden. Accordingly, the claim for painting and wall repairs is dismissed.

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5362807. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Re-tenanting costs	$793.50		Re-tenanting costs
Water rates to 02/10/2025	$24.00		Water rates to 02/10/2025

Claims and awards for application 5362807. Verify on MoJ.

Re-tenanting costs

Amount: $793.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Re-tenanting costs

Water rates to 02/10/2025

Amount: $24.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Water rates to 02/10/2025

Dismissed claims

Property Damage — __________________________________________________________________________________ 53628073 H Ben Fayed 17 December 2025 ______________________________________…

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Water Rates Property damage

Order

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,070.00 (6520349-001) immediately apportioned as follows: Realzea Limited T/A Realzea Property Management: $817.50 [The tenant/s] tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] tenant/s]: $1,252.50

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing by video.
This is a vacated tenancy that was ended early, prior to the conclusion of the fixed term. The applicant seeks $207.00 for cleaning, $793.50 for the costs of re- tenanting the property, $24.00 for water rates, and $977.50 for painting and wall repairs.
The respondent accepts the water costs and the costs of re-tenanting the property. Accordingly, I have not made any assessment of those claims, as they are ordered by consent.
With regard to the cleaning claim, section 40(1)(e)(iii) requires a tenant, at the conclusion of the tenancy, to leave the property in a reasonably clean and tidy state. It does not require the property to be returned in a perfect condition. The exit inspection photos reflect that the property was left in a reasonably clean and tidy state.
I accept the landlord’s evidence that the grooves of the sliding door and the rails could have benefited from further cleaning, and that there was one instance of a cobweb. However, considered in the context of the property as a whole, these matters do not alter my finding that the property was left in a reasonably clean and tidy state. The landlord could reasonably have attended to these minor issues, and the remainder of the items listed on the cleaning invoice were not required. This claim is therefore dismissed.
With regard to the claim for wall repairs, the damage described by the landlord largely appears to consist of scuff marks. The landlord states that the property was new at the commencement of the tenancy. However, a tenant is not required to return the property in a new condition, and fair wear and tear would reasonably be expected after a tenancy of approximately two years. The tenant is therefore not liable for this damage.
The landlord also provided a photograph showing that a wall in one of the rooms is a different colour. The landlord asserts that the tenants repainted this area and did so poorly. Had this been established, part of the cost may have been awardable. However, the tenant denies repainting the wall, and there is no corresponding entry condition report or pre-tenancy inspection photograph demonstrating that the wall was a different colour at the commencement of the tenancy.
As in all civil proceedings, the burden of proof rests with the applicant, who must satisfy the tribunal on the balance of probabilities that the respondent is liable. In this case, the applicant has not discharged that burden. Accordingly, the claim for painting and wall repairs is dismissed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5362807 — Cleanliness at 30 Whakato Avenue, Kumeu, Kumeu 0810

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5362807 — Cleanliness at 30 Whakato Avenue, Kumeu, Kumeu 0810

At a glance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.