What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5382045 about?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5382045?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5382045?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness, Boarding House.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5382045?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13696362-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5382045 about?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5382045?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5382045?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness, Boarding House.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5382045?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13696362-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

29 Casheltown Way, Flat Bush, Auckland 2019 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5382045 — Rent arrears

Order

The application is dismissed.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing which was held by videoconference. The tenant did not attend. The Tribunal contacted the tenant but without success. I am satisfied that adequate service of the hearing notice has been completed and proceeded with the hearing in the tenant’s absence.
This dispute arises following the end of a boarding house tenancy. The tenancy commenced on 27 August 2025 and ended on 30 October 2025. The weekly rent was $490.
The landlord seeks orders requiring the tenant to pay rent arrears of $1,670, electricity charges of $70, and cleaning costs of $100. The landlord also alleges that the tenant forged the landlord’s signature and improperly obtained a refund of the bond.
The burden of proving each claim rests with the landlord. The applicable standard of proof is the balance of probabilities. While the Tribunal is not bound by strict rules of evidence, it must nevertheless have sufficient reliable evidence to enable it to make findings of fact and determine the claims before it.
The court file shows that Tenancy Services, which administers Tribunal applications, wrote to the landlord on 9 January 2026 and again on 12 March 2026 advising that supporting evidence for the application was incomplete or missing. Those communications identified information required to properly support the claims, including a complete rent summary, supporting documentation for the electricity charges, and evidence supporting the cleaning claim.
The court file further records that on 12 March 2026 the landlord advised that she was able to provide the information requested. Despite that indication, the information was not subsequently filed.
The importance of providing adequate evidence was considered by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC TT233/02), where Judge Mather stated: “...[the applicant] needs to be reminded that anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or a 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.”
That principle applies directly in the present case. Rent arrears
Section 66K(1)(a) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 ( the Act) provides that the tenant of a boarding house must pay the rent when it is payable under the tenancy agreement.
The landlord seeks rent arrears of $1,670.
Where rent arrears are claimed, the Tribunal must be able to identify with precision how the arrears have been calculated. A proper rent ledger is a fundamental document in any claim for rent arrears. It should show the rent due throughout the tenancy, all payments received, any missed payments, and a running balance showing how any arrears accrued.
This information is important because it enables the Tribunal to independently verify the landlord’s calculations and determine whether the amount claimed is accurate. It also allows the tenant a fair opportunity to understand and respond to the claim.
The application did not contain a proper rent ledger. Tenancy Services subsequently requested that the landlord provide a complete rent summary and advised that a rent summary template was available on the Tenancy Services website. Despite those requests, no rent ledger or complete rent summary was produced.
The only financial document provided is a copy of the landlord’s bank statement. While a bank statement may show deposits received into an account, it does not establish what rent was due, whether deposits related to rent, whether adjustments or credits were made, or how the alleged arrears figure was calculated.
The absence of a rent ledger is particularly significant given that rent arrears comprise the largest component of the landlord’s claim. Without a complete record showing rent due, payments received, and the running balance, the Tribunal has no reliable means of determining whether the claimed arrears figure is correct.
Without a proper rent ledger, the Tribunal cannot verify the arrears claimed or determine whether any rent arrears are owing. To make an award in those circumstances would require speculation.
I am therefore not satisfied that the landlord has established the claim for rent arrears on the balance of probabilities. Electricity charges
Section 66E(1) of the Act provides that a boarding house landlord is responsible for all outgoings in respect of the boarding house that are incurred whether or not the boarding house is occupied, for common facilities, and in respect of rooms occupied by more than one tenant.
There is an exception where a utility charge relates solely to a tenant’s exclusive use. For example, where a tenant’s room is separately metered and the tenancy agreement provides that the tenant is responsible for electricity consumed in that room, the landlord may be entitled to recover those charges from the tenant.
However, the burden rests on the landlord to establish that the electricity charges claimed relate to the tenant’s exclusive use and are recoverable under the terms of the tenancy agreement. This requires evidence showing how the charges were calculated, the basis upon which the tenant became liable for those charges, and that the amount claimed relates to the tenant’s consumption rather than electricity used in common areas or elsewhere within the boarding house.
The landlord seeks reimbursement of electricity charges of $70.
At the hearing, the landlord explained that the amount claimed was calculated using readings from a check meter installed at the premises.
While a check meter may potentially provide a basis for charging electricity usage, no evidence has been provided to support the calculation. The landlord has not produced photographs of the meter readings, records showing the readings taken during the relevant period, details showing how the amount claimed was calculated, copies of any invoices issued to the tenant, or copies of any communications sent to the tenant advising of the electricity charges.
Tenancy Services specifically requested supporting documentation for this claim. None was provided.
This information is important because it enables the Tribunal to determine whether the amount claimed was properly calculated, whether it relates to the tenancy period in question, and whether the tenant was correctly notified of the charges.
Without this information, the Tribunal is unable to independently assess the claim or determine whether the amount sought is accurate. Again, to make an award would require speculation rather than findings based on evidence.
Accordingly, I am not satisfied that the landlord has established the electricity claim on the balance of probabilities. Cleaning costs
Section 66M(c) of the Act provides that on the termination of a tenancy, the tenant of a boarding house must leave the tenant’s boarding room in a reasonably clean and reasonably tidy condition, and remove all rubbish from the room.
The landlord seeks cleaning costs of $100.
At the hearing, the landlord stated that the premises were left in a poor condition and that substantial rubbish remained at the property after the tenancy ended. The landlord explained that a family member carried out the cleaning work rather than an independent contractor.
The Tribunal accepts that landlords are not required to engage commercial cleaners before compensation may be awarded. However, the landlord must still establish that cleaning beyond ordinary use and occupation was required and provide evidence of the loss suffered.
No photographs of the condition of the premises at the end of the tenancy have been provided. Nor has the landlord provided any inspection reports, invoices, receipts, quotations, or other evidence enabling the Tribunal to assess the condition in which the premises were left or the extent of any cleaning required.
Photographs are particularly important in a claim of this nature because they provide objective evidence of the property’s condition and allow the Tribunal to distinguish between ordinary wear and tear and any condition giving rise to a compensable loss.
Without such evidence, the Tribunal is unable to determine whether cleaning beyond the tenant’s ordinary obligations was required or whether the amount claimed is justified.
Accordingly, I am not satisfied that the cleaning claim has been established on the balance of probabilities. Allegation concerning the bond refund
The landlord alleges that the tenant forged the landlord’s signature and improperly obtained a refund of the bond.
At the hearing, the landlord explained that she had mistakenly lodged $1,470 with the Bond Centre, whereas the boarding house tenancy agreement records a bond of $980. The landlord advised that she was less concerned about pursuing the electricity and cleaning claims and primarily wished to recover bond monies which she believed had been improperly refunded.
In support of this allegation, the landlord has provided a police acknowledgement form indicating that a complaint was made to Police. The landlord has also provided correspondence sent to the Bond Centre.
I accept that the landlord made a complaint to Police. However, the police acknowledgement form merely confirms that a complaint was reported. It does not establish that any forgery occurred, that Police substantiated the allegation, or that any charges were laid.
The Tribunal has not been provided with the bond refund form allegedly containing the disputed signature, any evidence from the Bond Centre explaining how the refund was processed, any handwriting or expert evidence, or any independent evidence capable of establishing that the tenant forged the landlord’s signature.
Nor has the landlord provided sufficient evidence for the Tribunal to determine the circumstances surrounding the alleged overpayment of bond monies to the Bond Centre, whether any excess bond was refunded, whether any refund was paid to the tenant, or whether any monies remain recoverable.
An allegation of forgery is a serious allegation involving dishonesty and requires cogent evidence. The Tribunal cannot make findings of fraud, forgery, or dishonesty based solely on suspicion, assertion, or the fact that a complaint was made to Police.
On the evidence before me, I am unable to determine how the bond refund was processed, whether the landlord’s signature was used on any refund form, whether the signature was genuine or otherwise, or whether the tenant improperly obtained any bond monies.
I am therefore not satisfied that the landlord has established this aspect of the claim on the balance of probabilities. Conclusion
The landlord bears the burden of proving each claim advanced in the application.
The court file demonstrates that Tenancy Services identified deficiencies in the evidential material on 9 January 2026 and again on 12 March 2026. The landlord was informed of the information required to properly support the claims and subsequently advised that she was able to provide that information. Nevertheless, the necessary material was not filed.
This is not a case where a claim has been dismissed because of a technical deficiency or because the Tribunal has imposed an unreasonable evidential burden. Rather, the claims cannot succeed because the evidence necessary to enable findings of fact to be made has not been provided.
The absence of a proper rent ledger prevents the Tribunal from independently verifying the alleged rent arrears. The absence of check meter records, calculations, and supporting documentation prevents the Tribunal from assessing the electricity claim. The absence of photographs and supporting evidence prevents the Tribunal from assessing the cleaning claim. The allegation concerning the bond refund and alleged forgery is unsupported by sufficient evidence to permit any findings to be made.
As noted by Judge Mather in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC TT233/02), it is for an applicant to provide the evidence necessary to establish their claim. The Tribunal’s role is to determine disputes based on the evidence presented, not to investigate claims or speculate about what missing evidence might have shown.
I have carefully considered all material filed by the landlord and the explanations given at the hearing. However, even taking that material at its highest, I am not satisfied that any of the claims have been established on the balance of probabilities.
Accordingly, the landlord’s application is dismissed in its entirety.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5382045 — Rent arrears at 29 Casheltown Way, Flat Bush, Auckland 2019

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5382045 — Rent arrears at 29 Casheltown Way, Flat Bush, Auckland 2019

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions