Published tribunal order
Tenancy Tribunal case 5411709 — Rent arrears at 39 Cutler Street, New Lynn, Auckland 0600
Decided 9 Sept 2026 · Published 9 Sept 2026 · Application 5411709
- Rent arrears
- Cleanliness
Order
- [The tenant/s] tenant/s] to pay Barfoot & Thompson Limited Glenfield as Agent for Linda Jiang $3,188.68 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
- The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,067.07 (5268671-001) to Barfoot & Thompson Limited Glenfield as Agent for Linda Jiang immediately. The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,332.93 (5268671-001) to [The tenant/s] tenant/s] immediately.
- All other claims are dismissed.
Reasons
- Ms Cao appeared for the landlord via video. The tenant appeared by telephone.
- The tenancy commenced on 17 June 2023 and ended on 23 November 2025.
- On 10 December 2025, the landlord filed a claim for rent arrears and compensation for cleaning. On 24 February 2026, the matter was scheduled for a one-hour hearing on 30 March 2026. On the same day, the tenant filed a counterclaim seeking a refund of the bond and alleging that they had overpaid water and wastewater rates during the tenancy.
- The tenant also challenged the landlord’s rent summary and disputed the landlord’s claim that they failed to leave the property in a reasonably clean condition.
- During the hearing both parties produced evidence that had not previously been provided to the other party or the Tribunal.
- The landlord provided a spreadsheet recording all of the water and wastewater invoices for the tenancy. The tenant stated, that if they were able to reconcile the spread sheet with the actual invoices, the water and wastewater issue may be resolved, as they did not deny usage.
- There was insufficient time set aside to complete the hearing. I adjourned making directions that landlord provide the tenant, and the Tribunal, with all water and wastewater invoices for the tenancy, as well as any evidence supporting their claim that the tenant did not leave the property reasonably clean.
- I also directed that if the tenant wanted to dispute the landlord’s rent summary, they should provide bank statements showing any unrecorded payments.
- Both parties were directed to provide this material to the other party and the Tribunal by 08 April 2026.
- The landlord has provided the water and wastewater invoices for the period claimed. The tenant did not provide any additional material as directed. During the hearing, once again, the parties provided material to one another and the Tribunal. Rent
- The landlord gave 90 days’ notice, and the tenancy ended on 23 November 2025. The landlord has provided an up-to-date rent summary showing all of the rent payments received. Initially, the tenant disputed the amount paid, stating that there were at least two missing payments. The tenant provided an excel spreadsheet of all payments made from their bank account. All payments made appear to have been received by the landlord and included in the rent summary. I award the arrears claimed. Water and wastewater charges
- Under section 39 of the Act, the tenant is responsible for outgoings that are exclusively attributable to their occupation of the premises, such as electricity, gas, telephone, and water and wastewater charges.
- The landlord has provided all of the water and wastewater invoices for the period. Apart from an overpayment of $121.61, which was identified at the last hearing, the tenant has been unable to identify any other discrepancies. I am satisfied that the schedule provided at the first hearing is now supported by the individual invoices. Of the $1,803.26 claimed by the tenant, I award $121.61. Cleaning
- The landlord claims that the tenant failed to leave the property reasonably clean and tidy.
- The landlord conducted an end-of-tenancy inspection on 21 November 2025. They took photographs, some of which have been produced. These were sent to the tenant, who returned on 24 November 2025 to complete further cleaning. On 26 November 2025, the owner of the property visited and formed the view that the property had not been left reasonably clean. The landlord stated that on 28 November 2025, they sent the owners photographs to the tenant, who on 01 December 2025 replied, denying that they had failed to meet their obligations.
- The landlord returned to the property on 02 December 2025 and took additional photographs, which have also been produced. The landlord accepts that the tenant completed further cleaning but states that the property is large, with five bedrooms, and it is clear that the tenant missed some areas.
- The landlord provided the email correspondence to which the photographs were attached. The landlord is claiming $322.00 to clean the areas shown in the photographs.
- The tenant vehemently denies that they have failed to meet their obligations. They state that the owner unlawfully entered the property before the end of the tenancy, although no claim has yet been made. The tenant states that they returned on 24 November 2025 and completed further cleaning. They dispute the timing of the photographs the landlord claims to have taken on 02 December 2025, stating that those areas had already been cleaned. Law
- 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) of the Act.
- The Act does not require the premises to be provided or returned in a spotless or an immaculate condition. The standard is based on what an average bystander would consider reasonable, not on the subjective opinions of the landlord and tenant. The Tribunal will evaluate the evidence available, and in particular inspection reports and photographs.
- The onus of proving this claims rests with the landlord. The standard required is the balance of probabilities. The landlord must show that it is more likely than not the tenant has failed to leave the property reasonably clean and tidy. Analysis and decision
- I am satisfied that the photographs taken on 02 December 2025 were in fact taken on that date. Conducting an objective assessment of the evidence, I accept the landlord’s submission that the tenant has missed some areas. I am satisfied that the areas shown in the photographs have not been left reasonably clean and required further cleaning. However, based on the selection of photographs provided from 02 December 2025, I cannot find that the tenant has failed to leave the entire property reasonably clean. In my assessment, compensation of $100.00 is reasonable to clean the areas shown. Costs
- Under section 102 (4) of the Act, the Tribunal has the discretion to reimburse the filing fee of a party that has been partly successful with their claim.
- As both parties have been partly successful, any reimbursement to one would be cancelled by the award to the other. No orders are made. Name suppression
- Section 95A of the Act provides that on the application of a party that has been wholly or substantially successful in proceedings, the Tribunal must order that their name or identifying particulars of that party not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that it is in the public interest to publish the names of the parties, or is justified because of the parties’ conduct, or any other circumstances of the case.
- The landlord does not seek name suppression, and no orders are made. The tenant seeks name suppression. The tenant has not been substantially successful and there are no grounds to supress their name.