Tenantcheck Insights · Case study
Tenancy Tribunal case 5421947 — Cleanliness at 96 Leistrella Road, Hoon Hay, Christchurch 8025
Published 13 February 2026 · Application 5421947
- Cleanliness
At a glance
Key facts from the published tribunal order.
Outcome
Landlord favoured
From published order
Location
Christchurch
Tribunal region
Adjudicator
J Greene
Dispute themes
Award balance
Gross awards, any bond applied per the order, and the remaining balance payable.
- Gross award
- $557.30
- Total balance for Tenant to pay Landlord
- $557.30
Claims & awards
What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.
| Claim | Landlord | Tenant | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clean oil stain from driveway (consent | $285.50 | Clean oil stain from driveway (consent | |
| Cleaning (reduced | $243.80 | Cleaning (reduced | |
| Filing fee reimbursement | $28.00 | Filing fee reimbursement | |
| Net award | $557.30 | ||
| Total payable by Tenant to Landlord | $557.30 |
Claims and awards for application 5421947 — net $557.30 NZD. Verify on MoJ.
Clean oil stain from driveway (consent
- Amount
- $285.50
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Clean oil stain from driveway (consent
Cleaning (reduced
- Amount
- $243.80
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Cleaning (reduced
Filing fee reimbursement
- Amount
- $28.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Filing fee reimbursement
Net award
Landlord $557.30
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord
Landlord $557.30
Claim types — money lines allowed on this order
Order
- Rachel Wilson and Alastair Wilson must pay Harcourts Gold Property Management Limited as agent for Lynn & Steve Lewis $557.30 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:
- The tenants’ application is dismissed.
Reasons
- Mr Christiansen and Ms Mills represented the landlord. The tenant Ms Wilson advised she was unable to attend. She provided written submissions that I have considered.
- The landlord has applied for cleaning costs (interior cleaning and the removal of an oil stain from the driveway) and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
- The tenants have applied for the bond and for a refund of the professional carpet cleaning they had done.
- The landlord’s representatives advised me that the Bond Centre has paid the bond to the tenants in full, apparently in error. The landlord’s application
- Ms Wilson has confirmed that the tenants accept the landlord’s claim for the cost of removing an oil stain from the driveway. I have allowed that claim by consent.
- At the end of the tenancy the tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy (in addition to other responsibilities not relevant here) 1 .
- The landlord sent the tenants a cleaning checklist setting out the matters it believed required attention.
- Claims for cleaning are not decided on the subjective opinion of the parties. The Tribunal views the evidence objectively.
- Here, the Tribunal has the benefit of photographic evidence as well as entry and exit inspection reports. The evidence establishes on the balance of probabilities that some additional cleaning was required so that the premises were left reasonably clean. But the statutory requirement is no greater than that. Premises do not have to be left clean to a ‘motel’ standard. Landlords must expect to have to do some cleaning between tenancies.
- The invoice for the cleaning costs lacks any narration. The cleaners simply record 8 hours cleaning.
- I find that compensation equivalent to 4 hours cleaning would be appropriate here to meet the standard imposed on the tenants. The photographic evidence does not support a claim for 8 hours’ cleaning.
- I therefore award the landlord 50% of the claimed cost – $243.80. The tenants’ application
- The Bond Centre had paid the bond to the tenants. That part of their application is moot.
- They seek a refund of $200.00 which they paid for carpet cleaning. 1 See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA)
- The tenants rely on a ‘Tenant Guide for Final Inspection’ the landlord provided which states: Carpets to be vacuumed and if there are any marks then they will need to be professionally cleaned
- Based on that the tenants had the carpets cleaned.
- Mr Christiansen said that the carpets were not noted to require cleaning at the vacate inspection (probably because they had already been cleaned) nor had the tenants been asked to have the carpets professionally cleaned.
- There is no basis for the Tribunal to order the landlord to refund the tenants the carpet cleaning cost. It was their decision to have the carpets cleaned. The evidence does not establish that they were required to do that.
- I dismiss the tenants’ application. Result
- The tenants will pay the landlord $557.30, $285.50 of which is by consent. This includes reimbursement of the filing fee the landlord paid. As the tenant’s application is not successful, they must bear the cost of the filing fee on their application. Name suppression
- The landlord did not seek name suppression. The tenants sought name suppression. I make no name suppression order as their application is unsuccessful and their defence to the landlord’s application is only partly successful. 2
Topics & place
Topics are dispute themes across the order (not the same as claim-type money lines).
Residential Tenancies Act sections
s40(1), s95A
Key findings
- Dispute theme: cleaning
Property management
Frequently asked questions
Common questions about this Tenancy Tribunal case.
What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5421947?
The tribunal order states: Rachel Wilson and Alastair Wilson must pay Harcourts Gold Property
How much money was awarded in case 5421947?
Cleaning: $285.50 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $243.80 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord
What type of tenancy dispute was case 5421947?
The primary dispute was Cleanliness.
Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5421947?
The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13123303-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.