What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5395643 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

How much money was awarded in case 5395643?

Cleaning: $242.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,092.86 awarded to landlord; Walls: $311.66 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5395643?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5395643?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13737683-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5395643 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

How much money was awarded in case 5395643?

Cleaning: $242.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,092.86 awarded to landlord; Walls: $311.66 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5395643?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5395643?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13737683-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5395643 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5395643 — net $1,674.52 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 16 October 2025	$1,092.86	Rent arrears to 16 October 2025
Carpet Cleaning	$242.00	Carpet Cleaning
Repairs: Walls	$311.66	Repairs: Walls
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,674.52
Bond	$2,600.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,674.52

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord name and identifying details.
Brenda Marake to pay [The landlord/s] $1,674.52 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,600.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: [The landlord/s]: $1,674.52 Brenda Marake: $925.48

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 16 October 2025, as determined by me. The landlord was of the view that the tenancy ended on 27 October 2025. The confusion arose as the landlord had initially served a 90-day notice to terminate. The tenant found a new home and wanted to leave sooner. She was in a double rent paying situation and sought an early release, but the landlord insisted on appropriate 21-day written notice.
Having reviewed the emails from that time, I believe the tenant indicated via email on 23 September 2025 that she was intending to leave and proposed 30 September 2025, albeit ambiguously. The landlord response focused on rent in-lieu of any notice and the exact end date become confused between the parties. This is unfortunate but I consider the landlord was given written notice on 23 September 2025 that could have been easily clarified if uncertain. This did not occur. The tenant retained possession during the notice period she considered to be served.
Having considered the respective submissions and evidence, I have determined the tenancy end date should be 16 October 2025. Both parties had a role in the confusion that required such a determination. This date recognises some delay from the 23 September tenant email that may have been reasonably expected given the ambiguity as well as the considered failure of the landlord to respond appropriately to that email vis-à-vis the actual exit date.
That date equates to final rent arrears of $1.092.86. This total is awarded.

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 carpet had stains that required removal. The landlord provided photos and an invoice for $242.00. This is awarded in full.

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 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.
There were a number of plaster wall repairs arranged by the tenant. These were not completed and the landlord had a contractor complete or remedy the repairs and repaint as required. The two invoices provided also itemise other tasks completed that I do not consider proved as tenant liability, specifically the repair and repainting of multiple doors and door frames. I have also considered the lack of a fixed door stop at the front door as an absent fixture to mitigate possible door handle impacts, albeit there was some loose blocking evident in some photos.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The invoiced amounts totalled $890.47.
I have taken into account betterment. The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached their obligations, and should not be better or worse off.
Having considered the ingoing entry condition, betterment, and other tasks as also invoiced, I have applied a 35% allocation of the invoiced costs to the tenant. That equates to an award of $311.66 tenant contribution to the repair costs incurred by the landlord.
The landlord invoice for handyman repairs of $870.54 is dismissed. These tasks are not established as anything other than repairs due to expected wear and tear. Filing fee
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. Suppression
Section 95A RTA states regarding suppression orders that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
The landlord requested suppression in its application. As it has been substantially successful, suppression is ordered. Other matters
The entry photos evidence the premises as not being to a reasonable standard at commencement. The tenant claims an agreement was reached with the landlord for her to clean the premises with one week of rent to be credited. No credit is reflected in the rent summary, but I have no conclusive evidence of any such agreement to address that now by way of any order. I want to note the tenant clearly engaged in considerable effort at commencement to remedy the landlord’s failure to provide the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy condition at commencement.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5395643 — net $1,674.52 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 16 October 2025	$1,092.86	Rent arrears to 16 October 2025
Carpet Cleaning	$242.00	Carpet Cleaning
Repairs: Walls	$311.66	Repairs: Walls
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,674.52
Bond	$2,600.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,674.52

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord name and identifying details.
Brenda Marake to pay [The landlord/s] $1,674.52 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,600.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: [The landlord/s]: $1,674.52 Brenda Marake: $925.48

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 16 October 2025, as determined by me. The landlord was of the view that the tenancy ended on 27 October 2025. The confusion arose as the landlord had initially served a 90-day notice to terminate. The tenant found a new home and wanted to leave sooner. She was in a double rent paying situation and sought an early release, but the landlord insisted on appropriate 21-day written notice.
Having reviewed the emails from that time, I believe the tenant indicated via email on 23 September 2025 that she was intending to leave and proposed 30 September 2025, albeit ambiguously. The landlord response focused on rent in-lieu of any notice and the exact end date become confused between the parties. This is unfortunate but I consider the landlord was given written notice on 23 September 2025 that could have been easily clarified if uncertain. This did not occur. The tenant retained possession during the notice period she considered to be served.
Having considered the respective submissions and evidence, I have determined the tenancy end date should be 16 October 2025. Both parties had a role in the confusion that required such a determination. This date recognises some delay from the 23 September tenant email that may have been reasonably expected given the ambiguity as well as the considered failure of the landlord to respond appropriately to that email vis-à-vis the actual exit date.
That date equates to final rent arrears of $1.092.86. This total is awarded.

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 carpet had stains that required removal. The landlord provided photos and an invoice for $242.00. This is awarded in full.

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 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.
There were a number of plaster wall repairs arranged by the tenant. These were not completed and the landlord had a contractor complete or remedy the repairs and repaint as required. The two invoices provided also itemise other tasks completed that I do not consider proved as tenant liability, specifically the repair and repainting of multiple doors and door frames. I have also considered the lack of a fixed door stop at the front door as an absent fixture to mitigate possible door handle impacts, albeit there was some loose blocking evident in some photos.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The invoiced amounts totalled $890.47.
I have taken into account betterment. The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached their obligations, and should not be better or worse off.
Having considered the ingoing entry condition, betterment, and other tasks as also invoiced, I have applied a 35% allocation of the invoiced costs to the tenant. That equates to an award of $311.66 tenant contribution to the repair costs incurred by the landlord.
The landlord invoice for handyman repairs of $870.54 is dismissed. These tasks are not established as anything other than repairs due to expected wear and tear. Filing fee
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. Suppression
Section 95A RTA states regarding suppression orders that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
The landlord requested suppression in its application. As it has been substantially successful, suppression is ordered. Other matters
The entry photos evidence the premises as not being to a reasonable standard at commencement. The tenant claims an agreement was reached with the landlord for her to clean the premises with one week of rent to be credited. No credit is reflected in the rent summary, but I have no conclusive evidence of any such agreement to address that now by way of any order. I want to note the tenant clearly engaged in considerable effort at commencement to remedy the landlord’s failure to provide the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy condition at commencement.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5395643 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5395643 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

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

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

Frequently asked questions