What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5420954 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] must pay Jade Rental Properties Limited As Agents For D T

How much money was awarded in case 5420954?

Cleaning: $375.38 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $80.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $80.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Paint Walls And Door In The Bedroom…: $230.00 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: Carpet in the b…: $360.00 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: Carpet in the l…: $849.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Chipped Vanity: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $365.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5420954?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5420954?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13754611-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5420954 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] must pay Jade Rental Properties Limited As Agents For D T

How much money was awarded in case 5420954?

Cleaning: $375.38 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $80.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $80.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Paint Walls And Door In The Bedroom…: $230.00 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: Carpet in the b…: $360.00 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: Carpet in the l…: $849.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Chipped Vanity: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $365.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5420954?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5420954?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13754611-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

76 Ruahine Street, Paraparaumu, Paraparaumu 5032 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5420954 — Cleanliness

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5420954 — net $367.38 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Replace furnishings: Carpet in the bedroom by the laundry	$360.00	Replace furnishings: Carpet in the bedroom by the laundry
Replace furnishings: Chipped vanity	$200.00	Replace furnishings: Chipped vanity
Cleaning: bathroom, kitchen and laundry under sink	$80.00	Cleaning: bathroom, kitchen and laundry under sink
Carpet Cleaning	$375.38	Carpet Cleaning
Replace furnishings: Carpet in the lounge	$849.00	Replace furnishings: Carpet in the lounge
Paint walls and door in the bedroom beside the laundry	$230.00	Paint walls and door in the bedroom beside the laundry
Rubbish removal	$365.00	Rubbish removal
Cleaning: Clean oil from the driveway	$80.00	Cleaning: Clean oil from the driveway
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$367.38
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$367.38

Order

[The tenant/s] must pay Jade Rental Properties Limited As Agents For D T Family Trust $367.38 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,200.00 (5608545-004) to Jade Rental Properties Limited As Agents For D T Family Trust immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
Ms Foote appeared for the landlord by video conference.
Ms Jeffries, the tenant, appeared for herself by teleconference.
The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Background
The landlord applies for compensation arising from the tenancy which commenced on 24 June 2023 and ended on 15 November 2025.
Ms Jeffries disputes a number of the claims. She submits that some of the items complained of were present at the commencement of the tenancy, that she arranged professional carpet cleaning before vacating, and that several of the costs claimed are excessive or relate to ordinary wear and tear.
I heard evidence from both parties and have considered the documentary evidence filed.

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 Act”). The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs. Carpet cleaning
The landlord claims $375.38 for professional carpet cleaning undertaken to address staining and dog odour as part of its efforts to mitigate loss before determining whether further cleaning or replacement was necessary. See section 49 of the Act.
The landlord submits that, despite the tenant arranging carpet cleaning before vacating, the odour and staining remained.
The tenant submits that she had the carpets professionally cleaned before vacating and says that some staining existed at the commencement of the tenancy.
Ms Foote did not accept Ms Jeffries’ assertion that the staining was pre- existing. In any event, even if some staining existed at the commencement of the tenancy, the carpet ultimately required replacement because the odour remained and the landlord’s insurance policy did not cover damage caused by pet odour.
I accept the landlord's evidence that additional cleaning was reasonably required. The cost of $375.38 is awarded. Replacement of lounge carpet
The landlord claims $1,698.00 for replacement of carpet in the lounge due to staining and pet odour.
The tenant submits the carpet was not new at the commencement of the tenancy and points to pre-existing wear.
I accept that the carpet required replacement as a result of damage beyond fair wear and tear. However, I must take into account depreciation and avoid betterment. The evidence indicates the carpet was approximately five years old. Applying a 50% reduction for depreciation, I award $849.00. Painting of bedroom beside laundry
The landlord claims $747.50 for repainting walls and a door in the bedroom beside the laundry.
The tenant accepts some responsibility for damage to the door but submits the walls were not in perfect condition at the commencement of the tenancy and that there were existing marks, patches and defects.
I accept the tenant's submission that the room was not in pristine condition at the commencement of the tenancy. Taking into account the evidence of the property's condition, depreciation, and the principle against betterment, I award $230.00. Rubbish removal
The landlord claims part of a larger invoice for removal of rubbish and materials left at the property.
The tenant says some items were already present and disputes responsibility for all of the materials removed.
Having considered the evidence, I am satisfied that rubbish removal was required following the end of the tenancy. I award $365.00. Oil stain on driveway
The landlord claims the cost of cleaning an oil stain from the driveway.
The tenant accepts responsibility for the stain.
The claim is awarded in the sum of $80.00. Damaged weatherboards
The landlord seeks compensation for supplying and fixing a grill to damaged weatherboards.
The tenant disputes responsibility and says she was unaware how the damage occurred.
The evidence before me does not satisfy me that the damage exceeded fair wear and tear or that compensation should be awarded. This claim is declined. Cleaning for bathroom, kitchen and laundry under sink
The landlord seeks a further amount for cleaning.
The tenant is required to leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy. Reasonableness is objectively assessed. I have reviewed the exit inspection report.
I am not satisfied that the additional amount claimed of $160 is reasonable. I consider $80 reasonable because this is not a case where the tenant has not done any cleaning. However, I accept the tenant should have done more than the condition that was left. Replacement of bedroom carpet beside laundry
The landlord claims $720.00 for replacement of carpet in the bedroom beside the laundry due to dog odour.
The tenant disputes the extent of the damage and says she had arranged professional cleaning.
For the reasons already given in relation to depreciation and betterment, I award 50% of the claimed cost. The award is $360.00.

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. Replacement of a vanity
The landlord claims $1,421.24 for the replacement of a vanity top said to have been chipped during the tenancy. The damage could not be said to have been intentional. It was more likely than not that it was done carelessly.
The tenant disputes that replacement of the entire vanity was necessary and says the alleged damage is minor.
Following the hearing, I received a photograph identifying the chips relied upon by the landlord. I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the chips occurred during the tenancy and were likely caused by items being carelessly dropped onto the vanity surface. However, the damage consists of three relatively small chips. In my view, the damage could reasonably have been addressed by repair rather than complete replacement of the vanity top.
The claimed replacement cost of $1,421.24 is excessive and disproportionate to the extent of the damage shown in the photographs. Doing the best I can on the available evidence, I award $200.00.
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. Filing fee
Because Jade Rental Properties Limited As Agents For D T Family Trust has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5420954 — net $367.38 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Replace furnishings: Carpet in the bedroom by the laundry	$360.00	Replace furnishings: Carpet in the bedroom by the laundry
Replace furnishings: Chipped vanity	$200.00	Replace furnishings: Chipped vanity
Cleaning: bathroom, kitchen and laundry under sink	$80.00	Cleaning: bathroom, kitchen and laundry under sink
Carpet Cleaning	$375.38	Carpet Cleaning
Replace furnishings: Carpet in the lounge	$849.00	Replace furnishings: Carpet in the lounge
Paint walls and door in the bedroom beside the laundry	$230.00	Paint walls and door in the bedroom beside the laundry
Rubbish removal	$365.00	Rubbish removal
Cleaning: Clean oil from the driveway	$80.00	Cleaning: Clean oil from the driveway
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$367.38
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$367.38

Order

[The tenant/s] must pay Jade Rental Properties Limited As Agents For D T Family Trust $367.38 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,200.00 (5608545-004) to Jade Rental Properties Limited As Agents For D T Family Trust immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
Ms Foote appeared for the landlord by video conference.
Ms Jeffries, the tenant, appeared for herself by teleconference.
The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Background
The landlord applies for compensation arising from the tenancy which commenced on 24 June 2023 and ended on 15 November 2025.
Ms Jeffries disputes a number of the claims. She submits that some of the items complained of were present at the commencement of the tenancy, that she arranged professional carpet cleaning before vacating, and that several of the costs claimed are excessive or relate to ordinary wear and tear.
I heard evidence from both parties and have considered the documentary evidence filed.

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 Act”). The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs. Carpet cleaning
The landlord claims $375.38 for professional carpet cleaning undertaken to address staining and dog odour as part of its efforts to mitigate loss before determining whether further cleaning or replacement was necessary. See section 49 of the Act.
The landlord submits that, despite the tenant arranging carpet cleaning before vacating, the odour and staining remained.
The tenant submits that she had the carpets professionally cleaned before vacating and says that some staining existed at the commencement of the tenancy.
Ms Foote did not accept Ms Jeffries’ assertion that the staining was pre- existing. In any event, even if some staining existed at the commencement of the tenancy, the carpet ultimately required replacement because the odour remained and the landlord’s insurance policy did not cover damage caused by pet odour.
I accept the landlord's evidence that additional cleaning was reasonably required. The cost of $375.38 is awarded. Replacement of lounge carpet
The landlord claims $1,698.00 for replacement of carpet in the lounge due to staining and pet odour.
The tenant submits the carpet was not new at the commencement of the tenancy and points to pre-existing wear.
I accept that the carpet required replacement as a result of damage beyond fair wear and tear. However, I must take into account depreciation and avoid betterment. The evidence indicates the carpet was approximately five years old. Applying a 50% reduction for depreciation, I award $849.00. Painting of bedroom beside laundry
The landlord claims $747.50 for repainting walls and a door in the bedroom beside the laundry.
The tenant accepts some responsibility for damage to the door but submits the walls were not in perfect condition at the commencement of the tenancy and that there were existing marks, patches and defects.
I accept the tenant's submission that the room was not in pristine condition at the commencement of the tenancy. Taking into account the evidence of the property's condition, depreciation, and the principle against betterment, I award $230.00. Rubbish removal
The landlord claims part of a larger invoice for removal of rubbish and materials left at the property.
The tenant says some items were already present and disputes responsibility for all of the materials removed.
Having considered the evidence, I am satisfied that rubbish removal was required following the end of the tenancy. I award $365.00. Oil stain on driveway
The landlord claims the cost of cleaning an oil stain from the driveway.
The tenant accepts responsibility for the stain.
The claim is awarded in the sum of $80.00. Damaged weatherboards
The landlord seeks compensation for supplying and fixing a grill to damaged weatherboards.
The tenant disputes responsibility and says she was unaware how the damage occurred.
The evidence before me does not satisfy me that the damage exceeded fair wear and tear or that compensation should be awarded. This claim is declined. Cleaning for bathroom, kitchen and laundry under sink
The landlord seeks a further amount for cleaning.
The tenant is required to leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy. Reasonableness is objectively assessed. I have reviewed the exit inspection report.
I am not satisfied that the additional amount claimed of $160 is reasonable. I consider $80 reasonable because this is not a case where the tenant has not done any cleaning. However, I accept the tenant should have done more than the condition that was left. Replacement of bedroom carpet beside laundry
The landlord claims $720.00 for replacement of carpet in the bedroom beside the laundry due to dog odour.
The tenant disputes the extent of the damage and says she had arranged professional cleaning.
For the reasons already given in relation to depreciation and betterment, I award 50% of the claimed cost. The award is $360.00.

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. Replacement of a vanity
The landlord claims $1,421.24 for the replacement of a vanity top said to have been chipped during the tenancy. The damage could not be said to have been intentional. It was more likely than not that it was done carelessly.
The tenant disputes that replacement of the entire vanity was necessary and says the alleged damage is minor.
Following the hearing, I received a photograph identifying the chips relied upon by the landlord. I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the chips occurred during the tenancy and were likely caused by items being carelessly dropped onto the vanity surface. However, the damage consists of three relatively small chips. In my view, the damage could reasonably have been addressed by repair rather than complete replacement of the vanity top.
The claimed replacement cost of $1,421.24 is excessive and disproportionate to the extent of the damage shown in the photographs. Doing the best I can on the available evidence, I award $200.00.
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. Filing fee
Because Jade Rental Properties Limited As Agents For D T Family Trust has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5420954 — Cleanliness at 76 Ruahine Street, Paraparaumu, Paraparaumu 5032

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5420954 — Cleanliness at 76 Ruahine Street, Paraparaumu, Paraparaumu 5032

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions