What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5419049?

The tribunal order states: Jessica Heremia must pay Anand Kumar and Roshlin Lata $7,686.52

How much money was awarded in case 5419049?

Cleaning: $380.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $400.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Loss Of Rent - 1 Week: $760.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 5370022 D…: $5,708.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $255.27 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $155.25 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5419049?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5419049?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13431473-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5419049?

The tribunal order states: Jessica Heremia must pay Anand Kumar and Roshlin Lata $7,686.52

How much money was awarded in case 5419049?

Cleaning: $380.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $400.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Loss Of Rent - 1 Week: $760.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 5370022 D…: $5,708.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $255.27 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $155.25 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5419049?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5419049?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13431473-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

150 Kittyhawk Avenue, Wigram, Christchurch 8042 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5419049 — Cleanliness

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5419049 — net $7,686.52 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Previous order application 5370022 dated 02/12/2025	$5,708.00	Previous order application 5370022 dated 02/12/2025
Carpet Cleaning	$380.00	Carpet Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$255.27	Rubbish removal
Window repairs: and door repair - fixtures	$155.25	Window repairs: and door repair - fixtures
Carpet Cleaning: Carpet replacement - depreciated	$400.00	Carpet Cleaning: Carpet replacement - depreciated
Loss of rent - 1 week	$760.00	Loss of rent - 1 week
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	sful in their claim, I have ordered that the tenant reimburse the filing fee of $28. 10 Suppression
Net award	$7,686.52
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$7,686.52

Order

Jessica Heremia must pay Anand Kumar and Roshlin Lata $7,686.52 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 2 December 2025 under application 5370022.

The balance of the claim is dismissed.

Reasons

The landlord attended the remote hearing. The tenant did not connect to the MS Teams link provided to them and nor did they connect via telephone as instructed in the Notice of Hearing sent to them. The hearing proceeded in their absence.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Relevant legal considerations
The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations. That includes a requirement that the applicant establish their claims on the balance of probabilities. The balance of probabilities means more likely than un-likely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely. This obligation carried by the applicant is referred to as the “burden of proof”. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden. The Law – tenant’s obligations at the end of the tenancy
At the end of the tenancy the tenant must remove all his or her goods from the premises, leave the premises (including the land provided with the premises) reasonably clean and tidy, remove all rubbish, return all keys and security devices and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. 1 The Law - Tenants responsibility for damage
A tenant must not intentionally or carelessly cause damage or permit any other person to damage the premises. 2
Where a landlord is claiming compensation for damage 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. 3
Fair wear and tear can be described as damage which might reasonably be expected to naturally occur over time, such as the deterioration or gradual wear occurring with everyday use. 4
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 1 RTA, 40(1)(e). 2 RTA, s 40 (2)(a). 3 RTA s 40(2)(a), 41, 49B. 4 See Taylor v Webb [1937] 2KB 283 (CA). or four weeks' rent (or four weeks' market rent in the case of a tenant paying income-related rent). 5 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). 6 Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. 7
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. 8 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. 9
In assessing a claim for compensation, I must take 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 must take into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Previous order / rent arrears
On 2 December 2025 the Tribunal made an order relating to this tenancy, for termination, rent arrears and payment of the bond. The previous order is incorporated into this order for enforcement purposes.
There is no additional amount payable for rent arrears, therefore the claim for rent arrears is dismissed. Cleaning and rubbish removal
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
The carpet required cleaning as the tenant had cat inside and the landlord said the cat’s mess made the premises smelly. The tenant arranged for a carpet cleaner to clean the premises but left the address before paying them. The landlord paid the carpet cleaner and provided proof of payment. $380 is ordered accordingly. 5 RTA s 49B(3)(a). 6 RTA, s 49B(3)(b). 7 RTA s 49B(3A)(a). 8 RTA s 49B(1). 9 See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.
The tenant left a trailer load of rubbish. The amount claimed is $255.27 being $155.27 for the refuse fee and $100 of the landlord’s time (which the landlord said was 5-6 hours). I accept the oral evidence in respect of the landlord’s time, and I consider the amount claimed reasonable given the amount of rubbish left at the premises. Damage claims
The landlord’s insurance excess is $750.
The following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. Window and door fixtures were damaged and required repair. The landlord provided an invoice for the replacements of wedges and reattaching a slider door handle. The amount ordered is $155.25. b. The garage carpet was stained. A photograph was provided of the stain and the landlord said it could not be removed with cleaning. The landlord claims $1,100 for the carpet replacement. The landlord’s insurance did not cover the damage as the landlord replaced the carpet before making a claim. IR265 general depreciation rates provides that carpet has an estimated useful lifespan of 8 years. The landlord said the carpet was 5-6 years old however the garage carpet appears to otherwise be in good condition aside from the stain. In allowing for betterment and depreciation, I will order $400 in respect of this claim.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The amounts ordered are proved with proof of payment, invoices, oral evidence and photographs. Loss of rent
The landlord sought compensation for loss of rent of $760.
The Tribunal is cautious when awarding compensation for loss of rent. It is usually reserved for situations where significant cleaning, repairs, or rubbish removal was required which meant that the premises could not be re-let for a substantial period.
It is appropriate to take a conservative approach to claims for loss of rent because there are many variables that can influence the length of time that it takes to relet premises between tenancies. It is unrealistic for landlords to believe that there won’t be time periods between tenancies for various reasons.
In this case the work required to clear and prepare the premises for the next tenants took two weeks, however the landlord is only claiming one week. I will therefore allow compensation for loss of rent of $760 which allows for a usual delay that a landlord should anticipate between tenancies, but reflects the unexpected work required to be undertaken which resulted from the tenant’s breaches (in particular the carpet replacement) and would have been foreseeable by the tenant. Attachment order
The landlord seeks an attachment order from the Tribunal. Section 78 (2) (pa) RTA says the Tribunal has jurisdiction to record in any order requiring a party to pay money to any other party that the parties have agreed to enforce the payment of the amount specified in that order by way of an attachment order made under the District Court Act 2016. Therefore any attachment order made by the Tribunal must be made with the agreement of both parties, generally confirmed at the hearing. Where there is no agreement between the parties, the party seeking to enforce a money order of the Tribunal by way of an attachment order must do so through the Ministry of Justice civil debt enforcement procedures. Enforcement costs
The landlord seeks enforcement costs of $241, being the court fee for a financial assessment hearing. In this case there appears to have been issues with service of the hearing notice for the financial assessment hearing. If successful in the enforcement process this cost as that is a cost that may be ordered within the enforcement process and that is the appropriate way for the landlord to seek this cost. The claim for financial assessment hearing fee is dismissed. Filing Fee
Because the landlord has been wholly or partly successful in their claim, I have ordered that the tenant reimburse the filing fee of $28. 10 Suppression
The landlord did not seek name suppression

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5419049 — net $7,686.52 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Previous order application 5370022 dated 02/12/2025	$5,708.00	Previous order application 5370022 dated 02/12/2025
Carpet Cleaning	$380.00	Carpet Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$255.27	Rubbish removal
Window repairs: and door repair - fixtures	$155.25	Window repairs: and door repair - fixtures
Carpet Cleaning: Carpet replacement - depreciated	$400.00	Carpet Cleaning: Carpet replacement - depreciated
Loss of rent - 1 week	$760.00	Loss of rent - 1 week
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	sful in their claim, I have ordered that the tenant reimburse the filing fee of $28. 10 Suppression
Net award	$7,686.52
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$7,686.52

Order

Jessica Heremia must pay Anand Kumar and Roshlin Lata $7,686.52 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 2 December 2025 under application 5370022.

The balance of the claim is dismissed.

Reasons

The landlord attended the remote hearing. The tenant did not connect to the MS Teams link provided to them and nor did they connect via telephone as instructed in the Notice of Hearing sent to them. The hearing proceeded in their absence.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Relevant legal considerations
The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations. That includes a requirement that the applicant establish their claims on the balance of probabilities. The balance of probabilities means more likely than un-likely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely. This obligation carried by the applicant is referred to as the “burden of proof”. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden. The Law – tenant’s obligations at the end of the tenancy
At the end of the tenancy the tenant must remove all his or her goods from the premises, leave the premises (including the land provided with the premises) reasonably clean and tidy, remove all rubbish, return all keys and security devices and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. 1 The Law - Tenants responsibility for damage
A tenant must not intentionally or carelessly cause damage or permit any other person to damage the premises. 2
Where a landlord is claiming compensation for damage 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. 3
Fair wear and tear can be described as damage which might reasonably be expected to naturally occur over time, such as the deterioration or gradual wear occurring with everyday use. 4
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 1 RTA, 40(1)(e). 2 RTA, s 40 (2)(a). 3 RTA s 40(2)(a), 41, 49B. 4 See Taylor v Webb [1937] 2KB 283 (CA). or four weeks' rent (or four weeks' market rent in the case of a tenant paying income-related rent). 5 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). 6 Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. 7
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. 8 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. 9
In assessing a claim for compensation, I must take 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 must take into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Previous order / rent arrears
On 2 December 2025 the Tribunal made an order relating to this tenancy, for termination, rent arrears and payment of the bond. The previous order is incorporated into this order for enforcement purposes.
There is no additional amount payable for rent arrears, therefore the claim for rent arrears is dismissed. Cleaning and rubbish removal
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
The carpet required cleaning as the tenant had cat inside and the landlord said the cat’s mess made the premises smelly. The tenant arranged for a carpet cleaner to clean the premises but left the address before paying them. The landlord paid the carpet cleaner and provided proof of payment. $380 is ordered accordingly. 5 RTA s 49B(3)(a). 6 RTA, s 49B(3)(b). 7 RTA s 49B(3A)(a). 8 RTA s 49B(1). 9 See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.
The tenant left a trailer load of rubbish. The amount claimed is $255.27 being $155.27 for the refuse fee and $100 of the landlord’s time (which the landlord said was 5-6 hours). I accept the oral evidence in respect of the landlord’s time, and I consider the amount claimed reasonable given the amount of rubbish left at the premises. Damage claims
The landlord’s insurance excess is $750.
The following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. Window and door fixtures were damaged and required repair. The landlord provided an invoice for the replacements of wedges and reattaching a slider door handle. The amount ordered is $155.25. b. The garage carpet was stained. A photograph was provided of the stain and the landlord said it could not be removed with cleaning. The landlord claims $1,100 for the carpet replacement. The landlord’s insurance did not cover the damage as the landlord replaced the carpet before making a claim. IR265 general depreciation rates provides that carpet has an estimated useful lifespan of 8 years. The landlord said the carpet was 5-6 years old however the garage carpet appears to otherwise be in good condition aside from the stain. In allowing for betterment and depreciation, I will order $400 in respect of this claim.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The amounts ordered are proved with proof of payment, invoices, oral evidence and photographs. Loss of rent
The landlord sought compensation for loss of rent of $760.
The Tribunal is cautious when awarding compensation for loss of rent. It is usually reserved for situations where significant cleaning, repairs, or rubbish removal was required which meant that the premises could not be re-let for a substantial period.
It is appropriate to take a conservative approach to claims for loss of rent because there are many variables that can influence the length of time that it takes to relet premises between tenancies. It is unrealistic for landlords to believe that there won’t be time periods between tenancies for various reasons.
In this case the work required to clear and prepare the premises for the next tenants took two weeks, however the landlord is only claiming one week. I will therefore allow compensation for loss of rent of $760 which allows for a usual delay that a landlord should anticipate between tenancies, but reflects the unexpected work required to be undertaken which resulted from the tenant’s breaches (in particular the carpet replacement) and would have been foreseeable by the tenant. Attachment order
The landlord seeks an attachment order from the Tribunal. Section 78 (2) (pa) RTA says the Tribunal has jurisdiction to record in any order requiring a party to pay money to any other party that the parties have agreed to enforce the payment of the amount specified in that order by way of an attachment order made under the District Court Act 2016. Therefore any attachment order made by the Tribunal must be made with the agreement of both parties, generally confirmed at the hearing. Where there is no agreement between the parties, the party seeking to enforce a money order of the Tribunal by way of an attachment order must do so through the Ministry of Justice civil debt enforcement procedures. Enforcement costs
The landlord seeks enforcement costs of $241, being the court fee for a financial assessment hearing. In this case there appears to have been issues with service of the hearing notice for the financial assessment hearing. If successful in the enforcement process this cost as that is a cost that may be ordered within the enforcement process and that is the appropriate way for the landlord to seek this cost. The claim for financial assessment hearing fee is dismissed. Filing Fee
Because the landlord has been wholly or partly successful in their claim, I have ordered that the tenant reimburse the filing fee of $28. 10 Suppression
The landlord did not seek name suppression

Tenancy Tribunal case 5419049 — Cleanliness at 150 Kittyhawk Avenue, Wigram, Christchurch 8042

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5419049 — Cleanliness at 150 Kittyhawk Avenue, Wigram, Christchurch 8042

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions