What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5378461 about?

The tribunal order states: Monarch Realty Limited T/A Harcourts Hamilton Property Management As

How much money was awarded in case 5378461?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5378461?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5378461?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12895030-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5378461 about?

The tribunal order states: Monarch Realty Limited T/A Harcourts Hamilton Property Management As

How much money was awarded in case 5378461?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5378461?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5378461?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12895030-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat Unit 4, 32 Borman Road, Huntington, Hamilton Tenancy Tribunal Case 5378461 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing which was held by teleconference.

The landlord has applied for compensation, payment from the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

Are the tenants responsible for the damage to the bathroom vanity?

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.

The landlord claimed $1,523.75 from the tenants, that being half the cost of the total replacement of the bathroom vanity. Near the beginning of today’s hearing the landlord reduced the amount claimed to $1,322.50 because he acknowledged that the tenants ought not to pay the cost of the new taps – the invoice describes the taps as old and with something wrong with the fixings.

While the landlord acknowledged that the vanity was already damaged at the beginning of the tenancy, in his written evidence he referred to s40(1)(d) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 which he says provides that tenants must take reasonable care of the premises to ensure that existing issues are not exacerbated.

In fact s40(1)(d) provides that tenants must notify the landlord, as soon as possible after discovery, of any damage to the premises, or of any need for repairs.

This is exactly what the tenants did. At the very beginning of their tenancy they sent a photograph of the damage to the vanity to the landlord.

The landlord elected not to repair the damage at that time, and with normal water usage in the bathroom that damage has of course worsened. As the insurer said, in denying the landlord’s claim, this damage is gradual and so it will continue unless it is repaired.

For these reasons I am dismissing the landlord’s claim and retuning the remaining bond to the tenants. C ter Haar 18 December 2025

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing which was held by teleconference.

The landlord has applied for compensation, payment from the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

Are the tenants responsible for the damage to the bathroom vanity?

In fact s40(1)(d) provides that tenants must notify the landlord, as soon as possible after discovery, of any damage to the premises, or of any need for repairs.

This is exactly what the tenants did. At the very beginning of their tenancy they sent a photograph of the damage to the vanity to the landlord.

For these reasons I am dismissing the landlord’s claim and retuning the remaining bond to the tenants. C ter Haar 18 December 2025

Tenancy Tribunal case 5378461 — Property damage at Unit/Flat Unit 4, 32 Borman Road, Huntington, Hamilton

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5378461 — Property damage at Unit/Flat Unit 4, 32 Borman Road, Huntington, Hamilton

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Are the tenants responsible for the damage to the bathroom vanity?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.

Order

Reasons

Are the tenants responsible for the damage to the bathroom vanity?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.