Tenantcheck Insights · Case study
Tenancy Tribunal case 5424188 — Cleanliness at 29 Piko Crescent, Riccarton, Christchurch 8041
Published 26 March 2026 · Application 5424188
Landlord favoured
- Cleanliness
- Rent arrears
At a glance
Key facts from the published tribunal order.
Outcome
Landlord favoured
From published order
Location
Christchurch
Tribunal region
Adjudicator
R Armstrong
Dispute themes
Award balance
Gross awards, any bond applied per the order, and the remaining balance payable.
- Gross award
- $2,631.74
- Bond payment as ordered
- −$2,600.00
- Total balance for Tenant to pay Landlord
- $31.74
Claims & awards
What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.
| Claim | Landlord | Tenant | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rent arrears to 22 November 2025 | $100.00 | Rent arrears to 22 November 2025 | |
| Carpet Cleaning | $870.00 | Carpet Cleaning | |
| Cleaning | $511.75 | Cleaning | |
| Rubbish removal and garden work | $450.00 | Rubbish removal and garden work | |
| Curtains | $146.50 | Curtains | |
| Shower mixer | $150.00 | Shower mixer | |
| Pantry door and curtains | $195.50 | Pantry door and curtains | |
| Wallpaper | $120.00 | Wallpaper | |
| Driveway | $59.99 | Driveway | |
| Filing fee reimbursement | $28.00 | Filing fee reimbursement | |
| Net award | $31.74 | ||
| Total payable by Tenant to Landlord | $31.74 |
Claims and awards for application 5424188 — net $31.74 NZD. Verify on MoJ.
Rent arrears to 22 November 2025
- Amount
- $100.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Rent arrears to 22 November 2025
Carpet Cleaning
- Amount
- $870.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Carpet Cleaning
Cleaning
- Amount
- $511.75
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Cleaning
Rubbish removal and garden work
- Amount
- $450.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Rubbish removal and garden work
Curtains
- Amount
- $146.50
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Curtains
Shower mixer
- Amount
- $150.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Shower mixer
Pantry door and curtains
- Amount
- $195.50
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Pantry door and curtains
Wallpaper
- Amount
- $120.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Wallpaper
Driveway
- Amount
- $59.99
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Driveway
Filing fee reimbursement
- Amount
- $28.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Filing fee reimbursement
Net award
Landlord $31.74
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord
Landlord $31.74
Claim types — money lines allowed on this order
Order
- Judith Lawson must pay Holmwood Property Management (Sherborne Limited) as Agent for Campbell Church $31.74 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
- The landlords’ claims are otherwise dismissed.
- The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,600.00 (5824340-005) to Holmwood Property Management (Sherborne Limited) as Agent for Campbell Church immediately.
Reasons
- Both parties attended the hearing.
- The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, payment of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
- The tenant has applied for the bond. Rent
- The tenancy ended on 22 November 2025. The tenant had accepted the claim for $100 arrears for the last day of the tenancy. Other Claims Relevant Law
- At the end of the tenancy the tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and remove all rubbish.
- The tenant must not carelessly or intentionally damage 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).
- 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).
- 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.
- I must consider betterment and depreciation where appropriate. 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, the Tribunal considers the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Claims Accepted
- The tenant accepted the claims for curtain replacement, pantry door and curtain rail, wallpaper repair and oil stains on the driveway. I have therefore awarded them in full.
- I would add here that I found the tenant to be open and honest in her evidence. This tenancy went along very well for most of its time, and it is obvious that the tenant and the property manager were, and still are, on good terms. It seems that there were events that made things difficult for the tenant towards the end of the tenancy and she was not able to conclude the tenancy as she would have liked. Carpet Cleaning and Stain Removal
- The tenant had the carpets professionally cleaned at the end of the tenancy and produced an invoice.
- There were stains to the carpet during the tenancy and the tenant accepted responsibility for them. She said that they were mainly in the living area and the sleepout and she disputed the reasonableness of the claim for $1,770 for stain removal and carpet cleaning. That is made up of $1,500 for stain removal and $270 for general carpet cleaning.
- The invoice refers to 38 individual stains charged at $50 per stain. A discount has been applied reducing the cost per stain to approximately $40.
- I accept that it was reasonable to clean the carpet after the stain removal due to the chemicals used in that process. The $270 claimed is reasonable.
- I do not accept that $1,500 is reasonable for the stain removal. That is a very high charge in my experience. All parties must take reasonable steps to mitigate (reduce) their loss. In this case, when the landlords received the quotation for carpet cleaning, they should have obtained at least one other quotation. It is likely that it would have been substantially less than the one they accepted.
- I acknowledge that the carpet cleaners removed the stains and so there is no issue about their effectiveness. In my view, the practice of charging for every individual stain is not reasonable. The photographs show groups of small stains, and it is not clear to me why the cost of removing them would be more than removing an individual stain in the group.
- Based on the photographs, I assess a reasonable cost for the stain removal at $600. Together with the $270 for carpet cleaning, I have awarded $870. Cleaning
- The tenant did a fair amount of cleaning, but she accepted that she ran out of time and that some things were missed. She disputes the reasonableness of the invoice in the sum of $1,029.25 made up pf $850 for general cleaning and $45 for cleaning the bins plus GST.
- I agree that the claim is excessive. Based on the photographs, I assess a reasonable cost for general cleaning to be $400. I accept the cost of bin cleaning.
- In my view there is an element of inter-tenancy cleaning that goes beyond the standard of reasonably clean and tidy. I note as well that the cleaning included the outside windows which is not usually the tenant’s responsibility.
- I have therefore awarded $511.75 including GST. Rubbish Removal and Garden Work
- The tenant accepts that there was some rubbish to be removed, and garden work needed but she disputes the amount of rubbish. The invoice includes a washing machine, a steel frame and two tyres. I accept the tenant’s evidence that these items were on the premises at the start of the tenancy. The washing machine was the landlords’ and its is noted on the ingoing report that it would not be replaced if it stopped working.
- I also accept the tenant’s evidence that she removed the items left on the grass verge that are referred to in the invoice.
- I have therefore reduced the cost from $564.80 to $450. Shower Mixer
- The shower mixer in the shower in the laundry is the older style that one turns to start the flow and to control the temperature. They are still available but the mixers that control the flow and the temperature separately are more common now. It was one such mixer that replaced the existing mixer when the tenancy ended.
- The fitting around the mixer was missing at the end of the tenancy. The tenant was not aware of it, and it is not mentioned in the outgoing report. There was some question that it may have been removed after the tenancy ended. I find that it is likely that it happened during the tenancy.
- Due to the age of the mixer, a replacement fitting was not available and now a whole new mixer has been installed. That raises the issue of betterment. It also raises the issue of whether the tenant should be responsible for a new mixer when the damage was limited to an inexpensive fitting.
- Like everything, mixers have a limited life expectancy. It is not known how old the mixer was. The house was built in the 1940s and the shower style is certainly dated, possibly installed in the 1960’s or 70’s. In that case it would have been coming to the end of its life and the landlord now has a new and modern mixer. There is no formula for this, and I find that it is reasonable to award $150. Ranchslider Doors
- The landlords claim a contribution towards the cost of repairing two Ranchslider doors in the premises. The invoice refers to replacing the rollers for the doors. It also refers to an incorrect previous repair. The landlords accept that both doors were repaired during the tenancy.
- I am not satisfied that the need to repair the doors arose due to tenant damage. It is more likely to be fair wear and tear and so this claim is dismissed. Filing Fee
- The landlord has had significant success and so I have awarded the filing fee. Suppression
- There is no good reason to suppress the tenant’s name and so I refuse her request for suppression. Result
- The bond will be paid to the landlord and the tenant must pay the remaining liability.
Topics & place
Topics are dispute themes across the order (not the same as claim-type money lines).
Residential Tenancies Act sections
s32
Key findings
- Dispute theme: rent arrears
- Dispute theme: cleaning
Property management
Frequently asked questions
Common questions about this Tenancy Tribunal case.
What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5424188?
The tribunal order states: Judith Lawson must pay Holmwood Property Management (Sherborne Limited)
How much money was awarded in case 5424188?
Cleaning: $870.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $511.75 awarded to landlord; Curtains: $146.50 awarded to landlord; Driveway: $59.99 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $450.00 awarded to landlord; Pantry Door And Curtains: $195.50 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Shower Mixer: $150.00 awarded to landlord; Wallpaper: $120.00 awarded to landlord
What type of tenancy dispute was case 5424188?
The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Rent arrears.
Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5424188?
The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13353188-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.