How much money was awarded in case 5418725?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Kitchen Sink: $484.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,150.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $18.09 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5418725?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5418725?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13637767-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5418725?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Kitchen Sink: $484.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,150.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $18.09 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5418725?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5418725?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13637767-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5418725 — Property damage

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5418725 about?

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

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5418725 — net $908.59 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Replace furnishings: Carpet- insurance excess	$1,150.00	Replace furnishings: Carpet- insurance excess
Repairs: replace kitchen sink	$484.50	Repairs: replace kitchen sink
Rubbish removal	$18.09	Rubbish removal
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$908.59
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$908.59

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.

Kitana A S W Taane must pay [The landlord/s] $908.59 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $772.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

Only the landlord attended today’s hearing. The tenant did not attend by video or call into the hearing. The Tribunal tried to contact the tenant on the telephone number in the application, but that call was not answered. I am satisfied that the tenant was given notice of today’s hearing and have proceeded in her absence.

The landlord has applied for: a. Compensation for damage to the carpet – the landlord seeks the insurance excess of $1150.00. b. Compensation for damage to the sink – the landlord seeks the cost of a replacement sink $227.00 and installation $257.50. c. Dumping of rubbish – the landlord had sought $150 for this cost, but amended their claim today for the actual cost of $18.09 d. The filing fee.

The tenancy ended on 13 November 2025, after the tenant abandoned the tenancy. Rubbish

At the end of the tenancy tenants must remove all of their belongings and rubbish (see s40(1)(e)(ii-iii) RTA).

The tenant left some items at the tenancy that were of no value, and therefore had to be disposed of.

The landlord provided a receipt for the cost of disposing of the items left behind.

The amount is proven and awarded.

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.

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.

I am satisfied that the following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. Staining to the carpets throughout the house b. Areas where it appears that someone has attempted to remove the stains by chemicals and agitation so that the carpet has become fluffy in texture and has changed colour. c. A cut in the carpet the hallway. d. Something has pierced the stainless-steel sink, right through so that the sink leaks. The sink had tape on its underside and a container underneath it, which shows that the tenant was aware of the damage and did not report it to the landlord.

The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The landlord claimed cover from their insurers for the carpet damage. The landlord’s insurers sent ChemDry to the property, their comprehensive report was provided to the Tribunal. Their recommendation was that due to the nature and extent of the problems with the carpet that the carpet be replaced as many of the large stains were unlikely to come out of the carpet and the change of texture could not be improved.

The landlord’s insurers only charged one excess of $1150.00, and I consider it appropriate to award the value of the excess to the landlord.

The landlord provided invoices showing that they had paid the excess, paid for a new sink and to have it installed.

The amounts ordered are proved and awarded.

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. Name suppression and filing fee.

The landlord sought name suppression and is granted name suppression and the filing fee as the successful party.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5418725 — net $908.59 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Replace furnishings: Carpet- insurance excess	$1,150.00	Replace furnishings: Carpet- insurance excess
Repairs: replace kitchen sink	$484.50	Repairs: replace kitchen sink
Rubbish removal	$18.09	Rubbish removal
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$908.59
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$908.59

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
Kitana A S W Taane must pay [The landlord/s] $908.59 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $772.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

Only the landlord attended today’s hearing. The tenant did not attend by video or call into the hearing. The Tribunal tried to contact the tenant on the telephone number in the application, but that call was not answered. I am satisfied that the tenant was given notice of today’s hearing and have proceeded in her absence.
The landlord has applied for: a. Compensation for damage to the carpet – the landlord seeks the insurance excess of $1150.00. b. Compensation for damage to the sink – the landlord seeks the cost of a replacement sink $227.00 and installation $257.50. c. Dumping of rubbish – the landlord had sought $150 for this cost, but amended their claim today for the actual cost of $18.09 d. The filing fee.
The tenancy ended on 13 November 2025, after the tenant abandoned the tenancy. Rubbish
At the end of the tenancy tenants must remove all of their belongings and rubbish (see s40(1)(e)(ii-iii) RTA).
The tenant left some items at the tenancy that were of no value, and therefore had to be disposed of.
The landlord provided a receipt for the cost of disposing of the items left behind.
The amount is proven and awarded.

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.
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.
I am satisfied that the following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. Staining to the carpets throughout the house b. Areas where it appears that someone has attempted to remove the stains by chemicals and agitation so that the carpet has become fluffy in texture and has changed colour. c. A cut in the carpet the hallway. d. Something has pierced the stainless-steel sink, right through so that the sink leaks. The sink had tape on its underside and a container underneath it, which shows that the tenant was aware of the damage and did not report it to the landlord.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord claimed cover from their insurers for the carpet damage. The landlord’s insurers sent ChemDry to the property, their comprehensive report was provided to the Tribunal. Their recommendation was that due to the nature and extent of the problems with the carpet that the carpet be replaced as many of the large stains were unlikely to come out of the carpet and the change of texture could not be improved.
The landlord’s insurers only charged one excess of $1150.00, and I consider it appropriate to award the value of the excess to the landlord.
The landlord provided invoices showing that they had paid the excess, paid for a new sink and to have it installed.
The amounts ordered are proved and awarded.
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. Name suppression and filing fee.
The landlord sought name suppression and is granted name suppression and the filing fee as the successful party.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5418725 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5418725 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions