What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5393045 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 5393045?

Cleaning: $727.67 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $55.80 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $28.57 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $520.00 awarded to landlord; Driveway Fence Post: $177.48 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $78.16 awarded to landlord; Holes X 7: $284.42 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,312.96 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $162.31 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $54.03 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5393045?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5393045?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13075755-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5393045 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 5393045?

Cleaning: $727.67 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $55.80 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $28.57 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $520.00 awarded to landlord; Driveway Fence Post: $177.48 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $78.16 awarded to landlord; Holes X 7: $284.42 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,312.96 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $162.31 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $54.03 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5393045?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5393045?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13075755-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

25 Dockery Avenue, Onekawa, Napier 4110 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5393045 — Cleanliness

Tenantcheck Insights

25 Dockery Avenue, Onekawa, Napier 4110 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5393045 — Cleanliness | TenantCheck

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5393045 — net $3,401.40 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning: shed	$28.57	Cleaning: shed
Cleaning: house	$727.67	Cleaning: house
Repairs: driveway fence post	$177.48	Repairs: driveway fence post
Lawns and Garden work	$520.00	Lawns and Garden work
Repairs: hardboard damage	$78.16	Repairs: hardboard damage
Repairs: holes x 7	$284.42	Repairs: holes x 7
Cleaning: rangehood	$55.80	Cleaning: rangehood
Rubbish removal: exterior	$1,312.96	Rubbish removal: exterior
Rubbish removal: interior	$162.31	Rubbish removal: interior
Rubbish removal: tyres	$54.03	Rubbish removal: tyres
Net award	$3,401.40
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,401.40

Claims and awards for application 5393045 — net $3,401.40 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Cleaning: shed

Amount: $28.57
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning: shed

Cleaning: house

Amount: $727.67
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning: house

Repairs: driveway fence post

Amount: $177.48
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: driveway fence post

Lawns and Garden work

Amount: $520.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lawns and Garden work

Repairs: hardboard damage

Amount: $78.16
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: hardboard damage

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Lawns And Garden Work Property damage Rubbish Removal

Order

The Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details.
[The tenant/s] must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities $3,401.40 immediately, calculated as shown below.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for compensation following the end of the tenancy.

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 tenancy ended and the tenant vacated the premises on 19 August 2025.
Th landlord has provided an exit inspection report with photos of the premises taken on 27 August 2025.
The tenant insists that those photographs do not fairly represent the condition of the premises as she left them.
There is some possibility of damage to the property having occurred after she vacated, by people breaking in. It seems that the hot water cylinder was stolen after the tenant vacated.
I have taken that possibility onto account when looking at the photographic evidence.
I find it more likely than not, that the cleanliness of the premises when the tenant moved out and the rubbish that was left, as shown by the exit inspection photographs, shows the condition of the premises as left by the tenant, not the result of things that happened after she moved out. The nature and quantity of the rubbish left and the state of the premises, is consistent with the result of occupation rather than invasion.
The photographs show that a very large quantity of rubbish was left inside and outside the premises and that thorough cleaning was required.
The grounds were very overgrown, even allowing for a week’s growth between the date the tenant vacated and when the photos were taken.
The sums paid by the landlord to have that work done are proved by the work order records provided.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

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.
Where 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). The landlord does not hold insurance for tenant damage.
A landlord must prove that the damage occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. Where that is proved, it is then for the tenant to prove that it was not caused carelessly or intentionally.
During the hearing, several claims were withdrawn for lack of proof. Those claims are for: a. a hole in the bathroom door; b. replacement of fence posts; c. a hole in the laundry wall (accepted as caused during a family violence incident); d. gib for the firewall; e. bedroom wall holes; f. replacement of the stove.
I do not find the claim for repair of the cabinet doors in the kitchen proved. The tenant’s evidence is that the failure of the doors to close properly was due to the effects of unrepaired rot. It is not proved that the cause is more than normal wear and tear.
The remaining clams are proved by the photographic evidence. Again, the damage shown is consistent with it having been caused during occupation rather than invasion after the tenancy ended. It is not consistent with normal wear and tear.
The cost of the repair is proved by the landlord’s work order records. Other
During the hearing, the tenant wanted to discuss her grievances about the landlord’s maintenance and repair of the premises. I took the view that except to the extent that those issues are relevant to her response to these claims, her grievances will need to be formally raised through a separate application, giving the landlord fair chance to respond.
I also note that opportunity was given to discuss arrangements for payment of the compensation by instalments but the tenant did not want any such arrangements put in place.
The tenant has clearly indicated an intention to file an application herself in respect of this tenancy. It would be fair to order suppression of the tenant’s identifying details until that application is heard.

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5393045 — net $3,401.40 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning: shed	$28.57	Cleaning: shed
Cleaning: house	$727.67	Cleaning: house
Repairs: driveway fence post	$177.48	Repairs: driveway fence post
Lawns and Garden work	$520.00	Lawns and Garden work
Repairs: hardboard damage	$78.16	Repairs: hardboard damage
Repairs: holes x 7	$284.42	Repairs: holes x 7
Cleaning: rangehood	$55.80	Cleaning: rangehood
Rubbish removal: exterior	$1,312.96	Rubbish removal: exterior
Rubbish removal: interior	$162.31	Rubbish removal: interior
Rubbish removal: tyres	$54.03	Rubbish removal: tyres
Net award	$3,401.40
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,401.40

Claims and awards for application 5393045 — net $3,401.40 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Cleaning: shed

Amount: $28.57
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning: shed

Cleaning: house

Amount: $727.67
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning: house

Repairs: driveway fence post

Amount: $177.48
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: driveway fence post

Lawns and Garden work

Amount: $520.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lawns and Garden work

Repairs: hardboard damage

Amount: $78.16
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: hardboard damage

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Lawns And Garden Work Property damage Rubbish Removal

Order

The Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details.
[The tenant/s] must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities $3,401.40 immediately, calculated as shown below.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for compensation following the end of the tenancy.

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 tenancy ended and the tenant vacated the premises on 19 August 2025.
Th landlord has provided an exit inspection report with photos of the premises taken on 27 August 2025.
The tenant insists that those photographs do not fairly represent the condition of the premises as she left them.
There is some possibility of damage to the property having occurred after she vacated, by people breaking in. It seems that the hot water cylinder was stolen after the tenant vacated.
I have taken that possibility onto account when looking at the photographic evidence.
I find it more likely than not, that the cleanliness of the premises when the tenant moved out and the rubbish that was left, as shown by the exit inspection photographs, shows the condition of the premises as left by the tenant, not the result of things that happened after she moved out. The nature and quantity of the rubbish left and the state of the premises, is consistent with the result of occupation rather than invasion.
The photographs show that a very large quantity of rubbish was left inside and outside the premises and that thorough cleaning was required.
The grounds were very overgrown, even allowing for a week’s growth between the date the tenant vacated and when the photos were taken.
The sums paid by the landlord to have that work done are proved by the work order records provided.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

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.
Where 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). The landlord does not hold insurance for tenant damage.
A landlord must prove that the damage occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. Where that is proved, it is then for the tenant to prove that it was not caused carelessly or intentionally.
During the hearing, several claims were withdrawn for lack of proof. Those claims are for: a. a hole in the bathroom door; b. replacement of fence posts; c. a hole in the laundry wall (accepted as caused during a family violence incident); d. gib for the firewall; e. bedroom wall holes; f. replacement of the stove.
I do not find the claim for repair of the cabinet doors in the kitchen proved. The tenant’s evidence is that the failure of the doors to close properly was due to the effects of unrepaired rot. It is not proved that the cause is more than normal wear and tear.
The remaining clams are proved by the photographic evidence. Again, the damage shown is consistent with it having been caused during occupation rather than invasion after the tenancy ended. It is not consistent with normal wear and tear.
The cost of the repair is proved by the landlord’s work order records. Other
During the hearing, the tenant wanted to discuss her grievances about the landlord’s maintenance and repair of the premises. I took the view that except to the extent that those issues are relevant to her response to these claims, her grievances will need to be formally raised through a separate application, giving the landlord fair chance to respond.
I also note that opportunity was given to discuss arrangements for payment of the compensation by instalments but the tenant did not want any such arrangements put in place.
The tenant has clearly indicated an intention to file an application herself in respect of this tenancy. It would be fair to order suppression of the tenant’s identifying details until that application is heard.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5393045 — Cleanliness at 25 Dockery Avenue, Onekawa, Napier 4110

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5393045 — Cleanliness at 25 Dockery Avenue, Onekawa, Napier 4110

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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