Tenantcheck Insights · Case study
Tenancy Tribunal case 5421490 — Property damage at 8E Fow Street, Hamilton Central, Hamilton 3204
Published 9 April 2026 · Application 5421490
Landlord favoured
- Property damage
- Cleanliness
At a glance
Key facts from the published tribunal order.
Outcome
Landlord favoured
From published order
Location
Hamilton
Tribunal region
Adjudicator
M Manhire
Dispute themes
Award balance
Gross awards, any bond applied per the order, and the remaining balance payable.
- Gross award
- $2,794.63
- Total balance for Tenant to pay Landlord
- $2,794.63
Claims & awards
What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.
| Claim | Landlord | Tenant | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cleaning | $552.57 | Cleaning | |
| Rubbish removal | $532.05 | Rubbish removal | |
| Repairs: Walls and doors | $1,221.27 | Repairs: Walls and doors | |
| Repairs: Painting (depreciated | $488.74 | Repairs: Painting (depreciated | |
| Net award | $2,794.63 | ||
| Total payable by Tenant to Landlord | $2,794.63 |
Claims and awards for application 5421490 — net $2,794.63 NZD. Verify on MoJ.
Cleaning
- Amount
- $552.57
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Cleaning
Rubbish removal
- Amount
- $532.05
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Rubbish removal
Repairs: Walls and doors
- Amount
- $1,221.27
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Repairs: Walls and doors
Repairs: Painting (depreciated
- Amount
- $488.74
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Repairs: Painting (depreciated
Net award
Landlord $2,794.63
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord
Landlord $2,794.63
Claim types — money lines allowed on this order
Order
- Paul Graham Roberts must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities $2,794.63 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
Reasons
- The landlord attended the hearing via remote video conference. The tenant did not join the hearing via the video or telephone link as instructed in the notice of hearing. The tenancy continued in the tenant’s absence.
- The landlord has applied for compensation following the end of the tenancy.
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 landlord claims that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
- The landlord provided comprehensive entry and exit inspections reports, including detailed photographic evidence. The evidence clearly shows that the tenant did not remove all rubbish and personal belongings at the end of the tenancy. The tenant also failed to ensure the premises were left in a reasonably clean condition. The landlord also provided a detailed schedule of expenses incurred.
- The amounts ordered are proved.
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: damage to walls and doors. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
- The landlord claims that the tenant caused damage to walls and doors. They also claim that various doors had to be replaced. A bathroom vanity cabinet was also damaged and required replacement. There was graffiti which required removal. The living room and second bedroom walls required painting.
- The landlord provided detailed photographic evidence and a schedule of expenses in support of these claims.
- Having sighted the landlord’s evidence I am entirely satisfied that the tenant is responsible for the damage claimed.
- The amounts ordered are proved.
- 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 landlord does not seek reimbursement of the filing fee.
Topics & place
Topics are dispute themes across the order (not the same as claim-type money lines).
Residential Tenancies Act sections
s40(1), s40(2), s49B, s49B(1), s49B(3), s49B(3A)
Key findings
- Dispute theme: cleaning
- Dispute theme: property damage
Frequently asked questions
Common questions about this Tenancy Tribunal case.
What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5421490?
The tribunal order states: Paul Graham Roberts must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities
How much money was awarded in case 5421490?
Cleaning: $552.57 awarded to landlord; Painting (Depreciated: $488.74 awarded to landlord; Walls and Doors: $1,221.27 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $532.05 awarded to landlord
What type of tenancy dispute was case 5421490?
The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness.
Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5421490?
The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13418034-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.