What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5391902?

The tribunal order states: The tenants have requested suppression of their names and identifying details

How much money was awarded in case 5391902?

Cleaning: $750.00 awarded to landlord; Compensation: $1,140.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 5344622 D…: $3,828.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5391902?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5391902?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13057352-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5391902?

The tribunal order states: The tenants have requested suppression of their names and identifying details

How much money was awarded in case 5391902?

Cleaning: $750.00 awarded to landlord; Compensation: $1,140.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 5344622 D…: $3,828.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5391902?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5391902?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13057352-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

89 Blake Street, Blaketown, Greymouth 7805 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5391902 — Cleanliness

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5391902 — net $5,746.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Previous order application 5344622 dated 20/10/2025	$3,828.00	Previous order application 5344622 dated 20/10/2025
Compensation - failure to remove goods	$1,140.00	Compensation - failure to remove goods
Cleaning	$750.00	Cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$5,746.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,746.00

Order

The tenants have requested suppression of their names and identifying details but the grounds are not established 1 .
The tenants must arrange for their belongings to be removed from the garage at the tenancy address no later than 6pm on Sunday 15 February 2026.
If the tenants fail to comply with Order 2: a. the landlords may dispose of the goods left at the premises by the tenants by: i. selling all goods with a saleable value by public auction or by private contract at a reasonable market price, and ii. disposing of all goods with no saleable value as the landlords see fit.
The amount owing to the landlords out of the proceeds of any sale is $5,746.00.
The landlords must pay the proceeds of any sale, less the amount owing, to the Bond Centre together with a copy of this order.
Charmaine Marie Skerten and Shannon Lee Ohlson must pay Lynette Wallace and John Wallace $5,746.00 as below: 1 S.95A RTA

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing which was held by teleconference. Background
An Order was made on 20 October 2025 by consent, ending the tenancy on 27 October 2025 and requiring that the tenants pay the landlords $3,828.00 for rent arrears and the filing fee. That debt has not been paid.
The October Order noted that at the end of the tenancy the tenants were to “...return the property to the landlords in a reasonably clean and tidy condition with all their belongings removed.”
The tenants did not do that. The premises were left unclean with cat urine present. The tenants acknowledge that cannabis had been smoked inside.
The tenants did not remove their belongings.
The landlords tried to arrange for the tenants to remove their belongings but those goods are still there.
A new tenancy started on 27 November 2025 and the tenants’ belongings were put into storage in the garage, where they are now.
The parties agree the above arrangement. It is reasonable that if the tenants don’t collect their belongings as agreed, the landlords should be able to dispose of them and use any proceeds to reduce the tenants’ debt. Compensation
The landlords claim compensation equal to the 4 weeks’ rent payable for the period between the end of the tenancy and the start of the new tenancy.
The tenants agree to that claim but the Tribunal must nevertheless assess the claim and be satisfied that it is fair. 2
The landlords’ evidence is that they did not have a new tenancy arranged to begin when this tenancy ended.
They say, which is reasonable, that they would behave been able to rent the premises sooner if the tenants had removed their belongings as they were supposed to. They say that it might have taken a couple of weeks to establish a new tenancy if the premises were left vacant. There are other indirect costs such as having to remove and store the tenant’s belongings.
In those circumstances I fix 3 weeks’ rent as fair compensation to the landlords for the tenants’ breach of their obligation to remove their belongings from the premises. Cleaning
The landlords supplied some photographs showing the condition of the premises with their previous application. Those photographs show the premises less than reasonably clean and tidy. The tenants acknowledge that the premises would have taken quite a bit of cleaning.
The landlords paid $1,000.00 for the premises to be cleaned as well as a further $300.00 for extra carpet cleaning, which is not part of this claim.
The tenants again agree to the landlords’ claim but the Tribunal must be satisfied that it is reasonable.
The amount claimed is high for cleaning. But, as noted, the tenants acknowledge that there was cat urine and cannabis residues that needed to be dealt with, which would have increased the cleaning costs.
The tenants were required to leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, not to make sure the landlords didn’t have to do any cleaning or refreshing work before a new tenancy started.
I take into account too that these tenants moved into the premises a few months after the death of Ms Skerten’s mother who had been renting the property since April 2024. The evidence does not prove the condition of the premises when this tenancy started. The landlords say the previous tenant left it clean and tidy. No cleaning was done by the landlords between those tenancies.
In those circumstances I award the landlord $750.00 of the $1,000.00 compensation claimed. 2 S.11 RTA – “Any purported waiver by a tenant of any right or power conferred upon tenants by this Act shall be of no effect.” Locks
There is a dispute about whether the tenants returned all key. The landlords waive the claim for lock replacement. Enforcement costs
The landlords claim $170.00 for the cost of a means assessment undertaken as part of enforcing the October Order.
It is a cost flowing from the tenants’ breach of their obligations. However it is an enforcement cost that is included by the District Court’s process when the landlord seeks to enforce an order through the District Court. So I do not award it today to avoid potential duplication of the cost.
Because the landlords have substantially succeeded with the claim I reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5391902 — net $5,746.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Previous order application 5344622 dated 20/10/2025	$3,828.00	Previous order application 5344622 dated 20/10/2025
Compensation - failure to remove goods	$1,140.00	Compensation - failure to remove goods
Cleaning	$750.00	Cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$5,746.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,746.00

Order

The tenants have requested suppression of their names and identifying details but the grounds are not established 1 .
The tenants must arrange for their belongings to be removed from the garage at the tenancy address no later than 6pm on Sunday 15 February 2026.
If the tenants fail to comply with Order 2: a. the landlords may dispose of the goods left at the premises by the tenants by: i. selling all goods with a saleable value by public auction or by private contract at a reasonable market price, and ii. disposing of all goods with no saleable value as the landlords see fit.
The amount owing to the landlords out of the proceeds of any sale is $5,746.00.
The landlords must pay the proceeds of any sale, less the amount owing, to the Bond Centre together with a copy of this order.
Charmaine Marie Skerten and Shannon Lee Ohlson must pay Lynette Wallace and John Wallace $5,746.00 as below: 1 S.95A RTA

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing which was held by teleconference. Background
An Order was made on 20 October 2025 by consent, ending the tenancy on 27 October 2025 and requiring that the tenants pay the landlords $3,828.00 for rent arrears and the filing fee. That debt has not been paid.
The October Order noted that at the end of the tenancy the tenants were to “...return the property to the landlords in a reasonably clean and tidy condition with all their belongings removed.”
The tenants did not do that. The premises were left unclean with cat urine present. The tenants acknowledge that cannabis had been smoked inside.
The tenants did not remove their belongings.
The landlords tried to arrange for the tenants to remove their belongings but those goods are still there.
A new tenancy started on 27 November 2025 and the tenants’ belongings were put into storage in the garage, where they are now.
The parties agree the above arrangement. It is reasonable that if the tenants don’t collect their belongings as agreed, the landlords should be able to dispose of them and use any proceeds to reduce the tenants’ debt. Compensation
The landlords claim compensation equal to the 4 weeks’ rent payable for the period between the end of the tenancy and the start of the new tenancy.
The tenants agree to that claim but the Tribunal must nevertheless assess the claim and be satisfied that it is fair. 2
The landlords’ evidence is that they did not have a new tenancy arranged to begin when this tenancy ended.
They say, which is reasonable, that they would behave been able to rent the premises sooner if the tenants had removed their belongings as they were supposed to. They say that it might have taken a couple of weeks to establish a new tenancy if the premises were left vacant. There are other indirect costs such as having to remove and store the tenant’s belongings.
In those circumstances I fix 3 weeks’ rent as fair compensation to the landlords for the tenants’ breach of their obligation to remove their belongings from the premises. Cleaning
The landlords supplied some photographs showing the condition of the premises with their previous application. Those photographs show the premises less than reasonably clean and tidy. The tenants acknowledge that the premises would have taken quite a bit of cleaning.
The landlords paid $1,000.00 for the premises to be cleaned as well as a further $300.00 for extra carpet cleaning, which is not part of this claim.
The tenants again agree to the landlords’ claim but the Tribunal must be satisfied that it is reasonable.
The amount claimed is high for cleaning. But, as noted, the tenants acknowledge that there was cat urine and cannabis residues that needed to be dealt with, which would have increased the cleaning costs.
The tenants were required to leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, not to make sure the landlords didn’t have to do any cleaning or refreshing work before a new tenancy started.
I take into account too that these tenants moved into the premises a few months after the death of Ms Skerten’s mother who had been renting the property since April 2024. The evidence does not prove the condition of the premises when this tenancy started. The landlords say the previous tenant left it clean and tidy. No cleaning was done by the landlords between those tenancies.
In those circumstances I award the landlord $750.00 of the $1,000.00 compensation claimed. 2 S.11 RTA – “Any purported waiver by a tenant of any right or power conferred upon tenants by this Act shall be of no effect.” Locks
There is a dispute about whether the tenants returned all key. The landlords waive the claim for lock replacement. Enforcement costs
The landlords claim $170.00 for the cost of a means assessment undertaken as part of enforcing the October Order.
It is a cost flowing from the tenants’ breach of their obligations. However it is an enforcement cost that is included by the District Court’s process when the landlord seeks to enforce an order through the District Court. So I do not award it today to avoid potential duplication of the cost.
Because the landlords have substantially succeeded with the claim I reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5391902 — Cleanliness at 89 Blake Street, Blaketown, Greymouth 7805

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5391902 — Cleanliness at 89 Blake Street, Blaketown, Greymouth 7805

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions