Tenantcheck Insights · Case study
Tenancy Tribunal case 5402548 — Property damage at 448 Hillsborough Road, Mount Roskill, Auckland 1041
Decided 30 January 2026 · Published 30 January 2026 · Application 5402548
Landlord favoured
- Property damage
- Cleanliness
At a glance
Key facts from the published tribunal order.
Outcome
Landlord favoured
From published order
Location
Auckland
Tribunal region
Adjudicator
J Northwood
Dispute themes
Award balance
Gross awards, any bond applied per the order, and the remaining balance payable.
- Gross award
- $1,144.95
- Total balance for Tenant to pay Landlord
- $1,144.95
Claims & awards
What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.
| Claim | Landlord | Tenant | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Water rates | $45.20 | Water rates | |
| Repairs: flooring | $971.75 | Repairs: flooring | |
| Cleaning | $100.00 | Cleaning | |
| Filing fee reimbursement | $28.00 | Filing fee reimbursement | |
| Net award | $1,144.95 | ||
| Bond | $1,550.00 | ||
| Total payable by Tenant to Landlord | $1,144.95 |
Claims and awards for application 5402548 — net $1,144.95 NZD. Verify on MoJ.
Water rates
- Amount
- $45.20
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Water rates
Repairs: flooring
- Amount
- $971.75
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Repairs: flooring
Cleaning
- Amount
- $100.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement
- Amount
- $28.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Filing fee reimbursement
Net award
Landlord $1,144.95
Bond
Landlord $1,550.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord
Landlord $1,144.95
Claim types — money lines allowed on this order
Order
- Reshma NARAINSAMY to pay Christine Park $1,144.95 from the bond for the final water bill, repairs, cleaning, and reimbursement of the filing fee, as calculated as shown in table below:
- The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,550.00 (5685854-004) immediately apportioned as follows: Christine Park: $1,144.95 Reshma NARAINSAMY: $405.05
Reasons
- Both parties attended the hearing.
- The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Water bills:
- The landlord has provided a water bill which proves the cost of $45.20 is owing for the final water bill. The tenant does not dispute the water bill.
- The landlord has proven their claim for the cost of the water bill.
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 tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1) (ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
- The landlord states that the tenant did not leave the oven, extractor fan and shower reasonably clean and tidy.
- The tenant says that she paid a commercial cleaner to do the exit clean. However, she accepts that the oven and shower were not left reasonably clean and tidy.
- The landlord has provided a few photos and the inspection report which shows that the oven and shower were not clean.
- The landlord seeks the cost of $100.00 for the cleaning.
- I am satisfied that the landlord has proven their claim for the cleaning.
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 careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.
- 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.
- Where the damage is careless and is not covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to four weeks' rent (or market rent). See section 49B(3)(b) RTA. Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. See section 49B(3A) (a) RTA.
- 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.
- Damage is intentional where a person intends to cause damage and takes the necessary steps to achieve that purpose. Damage is also intentional where a person does something, or allows a situation to continue, knowing that damage is a certainty. See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.
- The following damage was caused during the tenancy: -The floor was damaged by using a steam cleaner on the wooden floorboards.
- The tenant does not dispute that during the tenancy she used a steam cleaner on the wooden flooring and caused damage to it. The tenant showed the landlord the damage who arranged for the flooring to be re-sanded and revarnished.
- The dispute was that the tenant would have liked the opportunity to get quotes herself and if possible, arrange for the work to be carried out. Regardless the tenant does accept that she has caused this damage and is prepared to pay a reasonable cost to repair the damage.
- The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
- The landlord provided photos of the damage and the cost of the repairs to the flooring. The repairs cost $1943.50. The Tribunal advised that depreciation would need to be included given that the flooring was last sanded and varnished in 2018.
- I have taken into account betterment and depreciation. 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. In calculating depreciation, I have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. The lifespan of flooring of this kind is 10 – 15 years. I have taken the midway point and deducted 50% off the cost for depreciation.
- The tenant is to pay the cost of $971.75 for the repairs to the flooring.
- Because Christine Park has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
- The Bond Centre is to split the bond as set out above and refund the money to both parties immediately.
Topics & place
Topics are dispute themes across the order (not the same as claim-type money lines).
Residential Tenancies Act sections
s10, s40(1), s40(2), s49B, s49B(3), s49B(3A)
Key findings
- Dispute theme: property damage
- Dispute theme: cleaning
Frequently asked questions
Common questions about this Tenancy Tribunal case.
What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5402548?
The tribunal order states: Reshma NARAINSAMY to pay Christine Park $1,144.95 from the bond for the
How much money was awarded in case 5402548?
Cleaning: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Flooring: $971.75 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $45.20 awarded to landlord
What type of tenancy dispute was case 5402548?
The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness.
Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5402548?
The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13052799-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.