What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5414928 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 5414928?

Cleaning: $630.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $80.50 awarded to landlord; Pest Control: $172.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $310.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $241.33 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,610.00 awarded to landlord; Rangehood Filters: $122.20 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,610.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $340.25 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $268.53 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5414928?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5414928?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13598194-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5414928 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 5414928?

Cleaning: $630.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $80.50 awarded to landlord; Pest Control: $172.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $310.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $241.33 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,610.00 awarded to landlord; Rangehood Filters: $122.20 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,610.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $340.25 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $268.53 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5414928?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5414928?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13598194-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit/Flat 1, 74 Haycock Avenue, Mount Roskill, Auckland Tenancy Tribunal Case 5414928 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

Unit/Flat 1, 74 Haycock Avenue, Mount Roskill, Auckland Tenancy Tribunal Case 5414928 — Property damage | 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 5414928 — net $5,413.81 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Lawns and Garden work	$80.50	Lawns and Garden work
Water rates	$268.53	Water rates
Rubbish removal	$340.25	Rubbish removal
Pest control	$172.50	Pest control
Rangehood filters	$122.20	Rangehood filters
Lock/key replacement	$310.50	Lock/key replacement
Stove repair	$241.33	Stove repair
Repairs: Blinds/kitchen cabinet/shower drain/door repairs	$1,610.00	Repairs: Blinds/kitchen cabinet/shower drain/door repairs
Cleaning: House/carpet/heat pump	$630.00	Cleaning: House/carpet/heat pump
Repairs	$1,610.00	Repairs: Blinds/kitchen cabinet/shower drain/door repairs
Net award	$5,413.81
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,413.81

Claims and awards for application 5414928 — net $5,413.81 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Filing fee reimbursement

Amount: $28.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Filing fee reimbursement

Lawns and Garden work

Amount: $80.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lawns and Garden work

Water rates

Amount: $268.53
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Water rates

Rubbish removal

Amount: $340.25
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal

Pest control

Amount: $172.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Pest control

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Filing Fee Lawns And Garden Work Pest Control Property damage Rubbish Removal Water Rates

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord name and identifying details.
Poukai Moana must pay [The landlord/s] $5,413.81 immediately being reimbursing filing fee, lawns, water rates, rubbish removal, pest control, rangehood filter replacement, locksmiths’ costs, stove repairs, repairs, replace furnishings and cleaning costs, as calculated and shown in table below: DescriptionLandlord Filing fee reimbursement$28.00 Lawns and Garden work$80.50 Water rates$268.53 Rubbish removal$340.25 Pest control$172.50 Rangehood filters$122.20 Lock/key replacement$310.50 Stove repair$241.33 Repairs: Blinds/kitchen cabinet/shower drain/door repairs$1,610.00 Cleaning: House/carpet/heat pump$630.00 Repairs$1,610.00 Total award$5,413.81 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$5,413.81
I am dismissing the landlord’s claim for the Bunning /Mitre 10 costs.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing, the tenant did not attend. The tenant was served with the notice of hearing and has not communicated with the Tribunal seeking an adjournment.
There have been two other hearings relating to this tenancy. The tenant has not attended any of the other hearings. I am proceeding with the hearing in the absence of the tenant.
The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for water rates?

The tenancy ended on 14 January 2025 after an order from the Tribunal. The landlord provided water rates invoices which prove the amount of $268.53 owing at the end of the tenancy.
I am satisfied that the landlord has proven their claim for water bills.

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 tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
The landlord provided the Tribunal with photos of the condition of the property at the end of the tenancy and invoices for the cost of the work carried out.
The photos show that the interior and exterior of the property was left with extensive rubbish. The lawns were overgrown and unkempt. The property was filthy in particular the carpets and oven.
The tenant had allowed up to three dogs to reside in the property, sometimes for extended periods. The carpet was covered in dog faeces and there was a flee infestation.
The landlord provided invoices for $80.50 for the lawns, rubbish removal costs and tip fees of $340.25, pest control costs of $172.50 and cleaning costs of $630.00.
The tenant did not return the keys after the termination of the tenancy. The landlord incurred the cost of $310.50 for locksmith costs.
The range hood filters were missing at the end of the tenancy. The landlord had to pay $122.20 for the replacement filters and has provided the invoice to prove the cost.
I am satisfied that the landlord has proven their claims for the tenant’s breach of their obligations at the end of the tenancy.
The landlord sought to claim the costs of items from Mitre 10 and Bunnings relating to products purchased for the clean-up. Unfortunately, the landlord was unable to provide the receipts for the items and therefore I must dismiss that claim.

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: -Stove was damaged and not working. -All the blinds in the property were ripped apart and destroyed. -A kitchen cabinet had the front drawer removed. -The shower drain cover was missing. -Multiple damages to the walls in the living room, dents, holes, scratches -Holes and gauges out of two internal doors -Window latches broken off. -Floor tile cracked through.
The landlord provided the pre let photos and the exit photos. The photos clearly show the extensive damage to the internal doors and walls, blinds, latches, floor tile and kitchen cabinet.
The landlord provided invoices to show the costs incurred to carry out the repairs. The damages occurred during this tenancy and were more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved.
In these circumstances 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 nature and extent of the damages were such that all the costs incurred to remedy the damage were to restore the premises to their original condition prior to the tenant’s occupation. There is no evidence that the landlord is seeking betterment or an improvement beyond the original states. Accordingly, no deduction for depreciation is required, as the amounts claimed do not exceed the cost of reinstatement to the previous condition.
Because [The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
The landlord has applied for suppression of their name and details and as they have been successful, I am granting suppression.

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 5414928 — net $5,413.81 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Lawns and Garden work	$80.50	Lawns and Garden work
Water rates	$268.53	Water rates
Rubbish removal	$340.25	Rubbish removal
Pest control	$172.50	Pest control
Rangehood filters	$122.20	Rangehood filters
Lock/key replacement	$310.50	Lock/key replacement
Stove repair	$241.33	Stove repair
Repairs: Blinds/kitchen cabinet/shower drain/door repairs	$1,610.00	Repairs: Blinds/kitchen cabinet/shower drain/door repairs
Cleaning: House/carpet/heat pump	$630.00	Cleaning: House/carpet/heat pump
Repairs	$1,610.00	Repairs: Blinds/kitchen cabinet/shower drain/door repairs
Net award	$5,413.81
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,413.81

Claims and awards for application 5414928 — net $5,413.81 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Filing fee reimbursement

Amount: $28.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Filing fee reimbursement

Lawns and Garden work

Amount: $80.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lawns and Garden work

Water rates

Amount: $268.53
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Water rates

Rubbish removal

Amount: $340.25
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal

Pest control

Amount: $172.50
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Pest control

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Filing Fee Lawns And Garden Work Pest Control Property damage Rubbish Removal Water Rates

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord name and identifying details.
Poukai Moana must pay [The landlord/s] $5,413.81 immediately being reimbursing filing fee, lawns, water rates, rubbish removal, pest control, rangehood filter replacement, locksmiths’ costs, stove repairs, repairs, replace furnishings and cleaning costs, as calculated and shown in table below: DescriptionLandlord Filing fee reimbursement$28.00 Lawns and Garden work$80.50 Water rates$268.53 Rubbish removal$340.25 Pest control$172.50 Rangehood filters$122.20 Lock/key replacement$310.50 Stove repair$241.33 Repairs: Blinds/kitchen cabinet/shower drain/door repairs$1,610.00 Cleaning: House/carpet/heat pump$630.00 Repairs$1,610.00 Total award$5,413.81 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$5,413.81
I am dismissing the landlord’s claim for the Bunning /Mitre 10 costs.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing, the tenant did not attend. The tenant was served with the notice of hearing and has not communicated with the Tribunal seeking an adjournment.
There have been two other hearings relating to this tenancy. The tenant has not attended any of the other hearings. I am proceeding with the hearing in the absence of the tenant.
The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for water rates?

The tenancy ended on 14 January 2025 after an order from the Tribunal. The landlord provided water rates invoices which prove the amount of $268.53 owing at the end of the tenancy.
I am satisfied that the landlord has proven their claim for water bills.

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 tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
The landlord provided the Tribunal with photos of the condition of the property at the end of the tenancy and invoices for the cost of the work carried out.
The photos show that the interior and exterior of the property was left with extensive rubbish. The lawns were overgrown and unkempt. The property was filthy in particular the carpets and oven.
The tenant had allowed up to three dogs to reside in the property, sometimes for extended periods. The carpet was covered in dog faeces and there was a flee infestation.
The landlord provided invoices for $80.50 for the lawns, rubbish removal costs and tip fees of $340.25, pest control costs of $172.50 and cleaning costs of $630.00.
The tenant did not return the keys after the termination of the tenancy. The landlord incurred the cost of $310.50 for locksmith costs.
The range hood filters were missing at the end of the tenancy. The landlord had to pay $122.20 for the replacement filters and has provided the invoice to prove the cost.
I am satisfied that the landlord has proven their claims for the tenant’s breach of their obligations at the end of the tenancy.
The landlord sought to claim the costs of items from Mitre 10 and Bunnings relating to products purchased for the clean-up. Unfortunately, the landlord was unable to provide the receipts for the items and therefore I must dismiss that claim.

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: -Stove was damaged and not working. -All the blinds in the property were ripped apart and destroyed. -A kitchen cabinet had the front drawer removed. -The shower drain cover was missing. -Multiple damages to the walls in the living room, dents, holes, scratches -Holes and gauges out of two internal doors -Window latches broken off. -Floor tile cracked through.
The landlord provided the pre let photos and the exit photos. The photos clearly show the extensive damage to the internal doors and walls, blinds, latches, floor tile and kitchen cabinet.
The landlord provided invoices to show the costs incurred to carry out the repairs. The damages occurred during this tenancy and were more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved.
In these circumstances 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 nature and extent of the damages were such that all the costs incurred to remedy the damage were to restore the premises to their original condition prior to the tenant’s occupation. There is no evidence that the landlord is seeking betterment or an improvement beyond the original states. Accordingly, no deduction for depreciation is required, as the amounts claimed do not exceed the cost of reinstatement to the previous condition.
Because [The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
The landlord has applied for suppression of their name and details and as they have been successful, I am granting suppression.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5414928 — Property damage at Unit/Flat 1, 74 Haycock Avenue, Mount Roskill, Auckland

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5414928 — Property damage at Unit/Flat 1, 74 Haycock Avenue, Mount Roskill, Auckland

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for water rates?

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

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for water rates?

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