How much money was awarded in case 5424352?

Blocked Drain: $352.83 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,111.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $571.43 awarded to landlord; Bathroom Floor: $235.75 awarded to landlord; Bedroom 2 Carpet: $1,034.86 awarded to landlord; Bedroom 3 Walls: $195.00 awarded to landlord; Fireplace Glass: $400.00 awarded to landlord; Light Shade And Bulb: $163.00 awarded to landlord; Painting Hallway Walls , 2 Doors: $448.50 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: Blinds rumpus r…: $988.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5424352?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5424352?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13459078-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5424352?

Blocked Drain: $352.83 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,111.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $571.43 awarded to landlord; Bathroom Floor: $235.75 awarded to landlord; Bedroom 2 Carpet: $1,034.86 awarded to landlord; Bedroom 3 Walls: $195.00 awarded to landlord; Fireplace Glass: $400.00 awarded to landlord; Light Shade And Bulb: $163.00 awarded to landlord; Painting Hallway Walls , 2 Doors: $448.50 awarded to landlord; Replace furnishings: Blinds rumpus r…: $988.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5424352?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5424352?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13459078-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

59 Malcolm Street, Riverlea, Hamilton 3216 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5424352 — Property damage

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5424352 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

Tenantcheck Insights

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5424352 — net $2,408.37 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$571.43	Rent arrears
Blocked drain	$352.83	Blocked drain
Repairs: Bedroom 3 walls	$195.00	Repairs: Bedroom 3 walls
Repairs: Bathroom floor	$235.75	Repairs: Bathroom floor
Repairs: light shade and bulb	$163.00	Repairs: light shade and bulb
Fridge replacement quote	$1,111.00	Fridge replacement quote
Repairs: Bedroom 2 carpet	$1,034.86	Repairs: Bedroom 2 carpet
Repairs: Fireplace glass	$400.00	Repairs: Fireplace glass
Replace furnishings: Blinds rumpus room and bedroom 3	$988.00	Replace furnishings: Blinds rumpus room and bedroom 3
Repairs: Painting hallway walls , 2 Doors	$448.50	Repairs: Painting hallway walls , 2 Doors
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,408.37
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,408.37

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord name and identifying details.

Anthony Oxley and Leanne Robson must pay [The landlord/s] $2,408.37 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,120.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

A tenant has the responsibility to inform a landlord of any damages or repairs that are required as soon as possible. See section 40(1)(d) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 29 September 2025. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy. The tenant did not dispute this saying the rent claimed is for the extra days the landlord gave them to finish attending to their end of tenancy responsibilities.

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 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: Upstairs shower drain

An upstairs shower drain was blocked by a plastic cap which required a Plumber to remove it. The tenant said that the whole premises was replumbed downstairs during the tenancy and that the cap could have been there for a while and moved when new plumbing was installed. The plumber said that the correct placement of the shower grates would have prevented the cap entering the drains. This was the second incident where something blocked the shower drain. The landlord paid for the first call out, but sought to recover this cost. I find that this is more than fair wear and tear and that it is more likely that the cap entered the shower drain form the upstairs shower than from the downstairs replumbing. Damages to walls in bedroom 3

The walls in this bedroom were damaged and chipped after the removal of items stuck to them. The tenant had replastered some damage but was unable to colour match and repaint. The walls had been repainted in April of the same year. Because of the relatively recent repaint of the wall the full amount claimed for repainting is awarded and no depreciation applied. Bathroom floor stains

The bathroom floor was stained and could not be cleaned. The tenant did not dispute this damage and its awarded as claimed. Light fitting damage

The wooden surround of a light fitting had come off and a bulb was not working. The tenant said the light fell on him while he was watching television but he did not inform the landlord.The landlord said that they found the light fitting and missing bulb at the end of the tenancy. The tenant had the obligation to inform the landlord of the damage and did not. This amount is awarded as claimed. Fridge damages

A fridge was provided with the premises. At the end of the tenancy the fridge had dents to all doors, including several significant dents to the right-hand side, and the internal tray was broken. The tenant said he did not know how this damage had occurred.

The landlord was unable to source replacement parts and obtained quotes of between $1,800.00 and $2,000.00 to replace the fridge. The landlord claimed the equivalent of the insurance excess, together with one call-out fee incurred in obtaining a repair quote.

The fridge was at least five years old at the end of the tenancy and was in good condition at the start of the tenancy. The Inland Revenue depreciation guidelines (IR265) indicate an expected useful life of approximately 8–12 years for domestic refrigerators. Given the condition of the fridge at the start of the tenancy, I adopt a total useful life of 10 years.

The fridge therefore had approximately five years of remaining useful life, representing 50 percent of its value. Using an average replacement cost of $1,900.00, the depreciated value attributable to the tenant’s damage is $950.00. The landlord is entitled to recover this amount, together with the reasonable call-out fee incurred when quotes were sought for unsuccessful repair options.. Carpet in Bedroom two was stained.

The landlord did not dispute this damage or the amount claimed. Fireplace glass was cracked.

The glass front panel of the fireplace was cracked. Pre tenancy photographs show it was not damaged. The tenant said that they had never used it because they had not been provided with a safety certificate. The landlord said one was available if they had requested it. This was a quote and a nominal award is made because the exact loss has not been quantified and the landlord has not completed the repair. I do not find that the landlord has established a loss and award a nominal sum to recognise that the tenant has breached their obligations and have caused damage for which they are liable. The wall in the hallway was damaged and two doors replaced by the tenant.

The tenant attended to repairs of holes in the wall in the hallway but was unable to repaint them to match and two doors were replaced but were slightly different to the original doors. The tenant said he believed the doors were superior but had not informed the landlord of the damages. The landlord disagreed and provided photographs of the doors showing that they needed to be repainted to match the rest of the house. The amount claimed is awarded. The blinds in two rooms were removed.

The blind in bedroom one disappeared during the tenancy and was replaced with an inferior pvc blind that did not fit .The tenant said the strings stopped working so he replaced it without telling the landlord.

The material roman blind in the rumpus room also disappeared. This was made of material that could not be found to match the rest of the room. The tenant said that this was lost by a drycleaner. The landlord was not informed.

The landlord broke down a larger invoice from the owner for the blind replacement and claimed for half the install cost. The amount claimed is reasonable as cheaper blind was purchased to replace the Roman blind and is awarded. Kitchen drawer front was missing.

There were two drawers in the kitchen that needed repairs. The landlord sought to repair the drawers and reuse the fronts but one was missing. The tenant said the drawers were swollen and broken. The kitchen was original late 70s early 80s and there was no evidence of the tenant damaging the drawer fronts. I find that this was a maintenance issue and this claim is dismissed.

The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

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.

Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee and granted name suppression as requested.

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5424352 — net $2,408.37 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$571.43	Rent arrears
Blocked drain	$352.83	Blocked drain
Repairs: Bedroom 3 walls	$195.00	Repairs: Bedroom 3 walls
Repairs: Bathroom floor	$235.75	Repairs: Bathroom floor
Repairs: light shade and bulb	$163.00	Repairs: light shade and bulb
Fridge replacement quote	$1,111.00	Fridge replacement quote
Repairs: Bedroom 2 carpet	$1,034.86	Repairs: Bedroom 2 carpet
Repairs: Fireplace glass	$400.00	Repairs: Fireplace glass
Replace furnishings: Blinds rumpus room and bedroom 3	$988.00	Replace furnishings: Blinds rumpus room and bedroom 3
Repairs: Painting hallway walls , 2 Doors	$448.50	Repairs: Painting hallway walls , 2 Doors
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,408.37
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,408.37

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord name and identifying details.

Anthony Oxley and Leanne Robson must pay [The landlord/s] $2,408.37 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,120.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

A tenant has the responsibility to inform a landlord of any damages or repairs that are required as soon as possible. See section 40(1)(d) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

How much is owed for rent?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The following damage was caused during the tenancy: Upstairs shower drain

The bathroom floor was stained and could not be cleaned. The tenant did not dispute this damage and its awarded as claimed. Light fitting damage

The landlord did not dispute this damage or the amount claimed. Fireplace glass was cracked.

The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The amounts ordered are proved.

Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee and granted name suppression as requested.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5424352 — Property damage at 59 Malcolm Street, Riverlea, Hamilton 3216

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5424352 — Property damage at 59 Malcolm Street, Riverlea, Hamilton 3216

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions