Tenantcheck Insights · Case study
Tenancy Tribunal case 5370121 — Property damage at Unit/Flat Unit 12, 1 Tennessee Avenue, Mangere East,
Published 27 January 2026 · Application 5370121
Landlord favoured
- Property damage
- Cleanliness
At a glance
Key facts from the published tribunal order.
Outcome
Landlord favoured
From published order
Location
Auckland
Tribunal region
Adjudicator
K Henry
Dispute themes
Award balance
Gross awards, any bond applied per the order, and the remaining balance payable.
- Gross award
- $2,596.79
- Total balance for Tenant to pay Landlord
- $2,596.79
Claims & awards
What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.
| Claim | Landlord | Tenant | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cleaning costs (Order by Consent | $690.00 | Cleaning costs (Order by Consent | |
| Garden work (Order by Consent | $143.75 | Garden work (Order by Consent | |
| Repairs to two toilet seats and a light cover (Order by Consent | $483.00 | Repairs to two toilet seats and a light cover (Order by Consent | |
| Replace carpets | $952.04 | Replace carpets | |
| Damage to curtains | $300.00 | Damage to curtains | |
| Filing fee reimbursement | $28.00 | Filing fee reimbursement | |
| Net award | $2,596.79 | ||
| Total payable by Tenant to Landlord | $2,596.79 |
Claims and awards for application 5370121 — net $2,596.79 NZD. Verify on MoJ.
Cleaning costs (Order by Consent
- Amount
- $690.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Cleaning costs (Order by Consent
Garden work (Order by Consent
- Amount
- $143.75
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Garden work (Order by Consent
Repairs to two toilet seats and a light cover (Order by Consent
- Amount
- $483.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Repairs to two toilet seats and a light cover (Order by Consent
Replace carpets
- Amount
- $952.04
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Replace carpets
Damage to curtains
- Amount
- $300.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Damage to curtains
Filing fee reimbursement
- Amount
- $28.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Filing fee reimbursement
Net award
Landlord $2,596.79
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord
Landlord $2,596.79
Claim types — money lines allowed on this order
Order
- Ani-Vera Mehana and Te Riri Kawiti to pay 360 Property Management Limited As Agent For Mj Corporation Limited $2,596.79 from the bond, calculated as shown in the table below.
- The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,596.79 (6529468-018) to 360 Property Management Limited As Agent For Mj Corporation Limited immediately. The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $123.21 (6529468-018) to Ani-Vera Mehana and Te Riri Kawiti immediately.
Reasons
- The hearing was conducted by telephone. Ms Francis, representative of the landlord’s agent, attended the hearing for the landlord. Ms Mehana attended the hearing and confirmed that she had authority to speak for the other tenant.
- The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
- The following matters were agreed by the parties during the hearing and are ordered by consent: a. Cleaning costs of $690.00 (including GST) being $862.50 (including GST) less $172.50 (including GST) for the cleaning of the carpets; b. $143.75 (including GST) to weed the garden at the end of the tenancy; and c. $483.00 for repair to two toilets seats and replacement of a light cover.
- The remaining claims were for compensation for damage to the curtains and the carpet. Relevant legal considerations:
- With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations. That means that it is for the party bringing the application to establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. That means that the party bringing the claim must establish that what they are claiming is more likely than not. This is referred to as the “burden of proof”. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
- As noted by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: ... [L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.
- I do not need to be completely certain, but I need to be more certain than uncertain. In deciding any particular claim, I must consider all the evidence presented (including oral evidence during the hearing). I must weigh this evidence to decide what is more likely.
Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?
- Sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B of the RTA provides that 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.
- Section 49B(3)(a) of the RTA provides that 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).
- Section 49B(3)(b) of the RTA provides that 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). Section 49B(3A)(a) of the RTA provides that where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage.
- Section 49B(1) of the RTA provides that 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.
- 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 says that during the tenancy, the tenant caused damage to the carpet and the curtains.
- Damage to the carpet: a. The landlord is claiming $1,234.99 (including GST) to replace the carpets. During the hearing, Ms Francis advised that the premises was a new build and the tenant was the first tenant. Ms Francis referred me to a number of photographs from the end of the tenancy showing that there were extensive stains to the carpet throughout the premises. b. During the hearing, the tenant said that she accepted responsibility for the damage to the carpet accepted the amount of the invoice. The tenant was not able to say how any of the stains occurred other than to say they were most likely caused by her young children. c. I must take 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. The Inland Revenue’s General Depreciation Guidance, IR 265, July 2025 1 provides that the useful lifespan of carpets in a residential rental property is 8 years. The tenancy lasted for a period of just over 1 year and 4.5 months. d. Having taken into account betterment and depreciation, I award $952.04 (including GST) for the damage to the carpet.
- Damage to the curtains: a. The landlord claims $1,696.25 to replace 3 sets of curtains. During the hearing, Ms Francis referred me to two photographs in the exit report to support this claim: a photograph showing a stain on the back lining of one curtain and another photograph showing some damage to the lining of another curtain. The tenant accepted responsibility for the damage in these photographs. However, the tenant disputed that the tenant was responsible for damage to the curtains that warranted replacement. b. On the basis of the evidence provided to me and given that this is the landlord’s claim, and the landlord has the burden of proof, I am not satisfied that the damage caused to the curtains during the tenancy warranted full replacement of the curtains. c. It is not possible to know how much it would have cost the landlord to remedy the damage supported by the photographs Ms Francis referenced to support this claim. I award nominal damages of $300 (including GST). Filing fee:
- The landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim. For this reason, I must award reimbursement of the filing fee.
Topics & place
Topics are dispute themes across the order (not the same as claim-type money lines).
Residential Tenancies Act sections
s40(2), s49B(1), s49B(3), s49B(3A), s8
Key findings
- Dispute theme: cleaning
- Dispute theme: property damage
Property management
Frequently asked questions
Common questions about this Tenancy Tribunal case.
What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5370121?
The tribunal order states: Ani-Vera Mehana and Te Riri Kawiti to pay 360 Property Management Limited
How much money was awarded in case 5370121?
Cleaning: $690.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $143.75 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $483.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $300.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Carpets: $952.04 awarded to landlord
What type of tenancy dispute was case 5370121?
The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness.
Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5370121?
The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13026086-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.