What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5375502?

The tribunal order states: Santanna Teresa Kaneihana to pay Russell Hardie Limited $2,119.69

How much money was awarded in case 5375502?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5375502?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Smoke alarms, Cleanliness, Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5375502?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12950959-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5375502?

The tribunal order states: Santanna Teresa Kaneihana to pay Russell Hardie Limited $2,119.69

How much money was awarded in case 5375502?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5375502?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Smoke alarms, Cleanliness, Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5375502?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12950959-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

50B Gordon Road, Western Heights, Rotorua 3015 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5375502 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

50B Gordon Road, Western Heights, Rotorua 3015 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5375502 — Rent arrears | TenantCheck

Order

Santanna Teresa Kaneihana to pay Russell Hardie Limited $2,119.69 immediately, calculated as follows: DescriptionAmount ($) Rent arrears to vacate (to 8 September 2025)1,700.00 Cleaning – end of tenancy568.96 Carpet cleaning140.00 Rubbish removal (items and furniture left behind)685.00 Maintenance and wall repairs / lock removal223.68 Bathroom window reglazing254.44 Electrical repairs (lights, smoke alarm, heat-pump remote)479.61 Tribunal application fee (10 July 2025)28.00 Subtotal4,079.69 Less bond applied(1,960.00) Total awarded2,119.69

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 8 September 2025. The landlord provided rent records which establish that rent was paid up to and including 14 August 2025, with a part-payment of $50.00 thereafter. Rent arrears accrued to vacate total $1,700.00.
The bond of $1,960.00 was applied with $1,700.00 allocated to rent arrears, and the balance applied toward cleaning costs. The rent arrears to vacate are proved.

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 is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. Extensive cleaning was required throughout the premises, and personal items and furniture were left behind which the tenant confirmed she did not want.
Cleaning, carpet cleaning, and rubbish removal were required as a result of the tenant’s failure to meet end-of-tenancy obligations. The Landlord reports that very little cleaning had been done, with extensive cleaning required throughout the premises including walls, floors, kitchen appliances, bathroom fittings, windows, light fittings, and doors. The tenant also left behind personal items and furniture in the dwelling, garage, and grounds, which she later confirmed she did not want collected. Rubbish was left under the steps and around the section, and a deep freeze was left on site. In addition, the carpets required cleaning due to soiling and staining identified at inspection. The work undertaken went beyond fair wear and tear and was necessary to return the premises to a reasonably clean and tidy condition. The amounts claimed for cleaning, carpet cleaning, and rubbish removal are reasonable and are proved.
The amounts claimed for cleaning ($568.96), carpet cleaning ($140.00), and rubbish removal ($685.00) are reasonable and 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 has proved that the following damage occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear: a. Missing smoke alarm requiring reinstatement; b. Kitchen blind requiring replacement; c. Bathroom window requiring reglazing; d. Wall damage requiring repair and making good; e. Removal of an unauthorised privacy lock and making good; f. Electrical issues including a broken lounge light and heat-pump remote damage.
The tenant has not disproved liability for this damage. The damage is assessed as careless rather than intentional.
The amounts claimed for maintenance and repairs ($223.68), window glazing ($254.44), and electrical work ($479.61) are supported by the evidence and are proved.
I have taken into account betterment and depreciation. The landlord is entitled to be restored to the position they would have been in had the tenant met her obligations, but not to be better off.
The filing fee of $28.00 is recoverable.

Order

Santanna Teresa Kaneihana to pay Russell Hardie Limited $2,119.69 immediately, calculated as follows: DescriptionAmount ($) Rent arrears to vacate (to 8 September 2025)1,700.00 Cleaning – end of tenancy568.96 Carpet cleaning140.00 Rubbish removal (items and furniture left behind)685.00 Maintenance and wall repairs / lock removal223.68 Bathroom window reglazing254.44 Electrical repairs (lights, smoke alarm, heat-pump remote)479.61 Tribunal application fee (10 July 2025)28.00 Subtotal4,079.69 Less bond applied(1,960.00) Total awarded2,119.69

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 8 September 2025. The landlord provided rent records which establish that rent was paid up to and including 14 August 2025, with a part-payment of $50.00 thereafter. Rent arrears accrued to vacate total $1,700.00.
The bond of $1,960.00 was applied with $1,700.00 allocated to rent arrears, and the balance applied toward cleaning costs. The rent arrears to vacate are proved.

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 is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. Extensive cleaning was required throughout the premises, and personal items and furniture were left behind which the tenant confirmed she did not want.
Cleaning, carpet cleaning, and rubbish removal were required as a result of the tenant’s failure to meet end-of-tenancy obligations. The Landlord reports that very little cleaning had been done, with extensive cleaning required throughout the premises including walls, floors, kitchen appliances, bathroom fittings, windows, light fittings, and doors. The tenant also left behind personal items and furniture in the dwelling, garage, and grounds, which she later confirmed she did not want collected. Rubbish was left under the steps and around the section, and a deep freeze was left on site. In addition, the carpets required cleaning due to soiling and staining identified at inspection. The work undertaken went beyond fair wear and tear and was necessary to return the premises to a reasonably clean and tidy condition. The amounts claimed for cleaning, carpet cleaning, and rubbish removal are reasonable and are proved.
The amounts claimed for cleaning ($568.96), carpet cleaning ($140.00), and rubbish removal ($685.00) are reasonable and 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 has proved that the following damage occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear: a. Missing smoke alarm requiring reinstatement; b. Kitchen blind requiring replacement; c. Bathroom window requiring reglazing; d. Wall damage requiring repair and making good; e. Removal of an unauthorised privacy lock and making good; f. Electrical issues including a broken lounge light and heat-pump remote damage.
The tenant has not disproved liability for this damage. The damage is assessed as careless rather than intentional.
The amounts claimed for maintenance and repairs ($223.68), window glazing ($254.44), and electrical work ($479.61) are supported by the evidence and are proved.
I have taken into account betterment and depreciation. The landlord is entitled to be restored to the position they would have been in had the tenant met her obligations, but not to be better off.
The filing fee of $28.00 is recoverable.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5375502 — Rent arrears at 50B Gordon Road, Western Heights, Rotorua 3015

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5375502 — Rent arrears at 50B Gordon Road, Western Heights, Rotorua 3015

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions