Tenantcheck Insights · Case study
Tenancy Tribunal case 5427048 — Cleanliness at 8795C Paeroa Kopu Road, Puriri, RD 1, Thames 3578
Decided 1 May 2026 · Published 1 May 2026 · Application 5427048
- Cleanliness
- Property damage
At a glance
Key facts from the published tribunal order.
Outcome
Landlord favoured
From published order
Location
Thames
Tribunal region
Adjudicator
R Merrett
Dispute themes
Award balance
Gross awards, any bond applied per the order, and the remaining balance payable.
- Gross award
- $2,055.24
- Total balance for Tenant to pay Landlord
- $2,055.24
Claims & awards
What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.
| Claim | Landlord | Tenant | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Previous order application 5343701 dated 05/11/2025 | $660.42 | Previous order application 5343701 dated 05/11/2025 | |
| Cleaning | $245.00 | Cleaning | |
| Carpet Cleaning | $264.50 | Carpet Cleaning | |
| Rubbish removal | $457.32 | Rubbish removal | |
| Repair walls and doors | $400.00 | Repair walls and doors | |
| Filing fee reimbursement | $28.00 | Filing fee reimbursement | |
| Net award | $2,055.24 | ||
| Total payable by Tenant to Landlord | $2,055.24 |
Claims and awards for application 5427048 — net $2,055.24 NZD. Verify on MoJ.
Previous order application 5343701 dated 05/11/2025
- Amount
- $660.42
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Previous order application 5343701 dated 05/11/2025
Cleaning
- Amount
- $245.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Cleaning
Carpet Cleaning
- Amount
- $264.50
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Carpet Cleaning
Rubbish removal
- Amount
- $457.32
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Rubbish removal
Repair walls and doors
- Amount
- $400.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Repair walls and doors
Filing fee reimbursement
- Amount
- $28.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Filing fee reimbursement
Net award
Landlord $2,055.24
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord
Landlord $2,055.24
Claim types — money lines allowed on this order
Order
- Alicia McCarthy must pay Pure Property Management NZ Ltd and Oaklane Dairies Limited $2,055.24 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
- This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 5 November 2025 under application 5343701.
- The claim for cost to repair a broken window is dismissed.
Reasons
- Ms Loader attended the hearing for the landlord. The tenant was phoned on the number provided in the tenancy agreement but the call went to voicemail.
- The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?
- The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and did not remove all rubbish as required by section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act).
- The amounts ordered are proved.
Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?
- To be successful in a claim for damage to the premises, the landlord must prove that damage occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. If this is established, to avoid liability, the tenant must prove they, or others at the premises with their permission, did not carelessly or intentionally cause or permit the damage: sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B of the Act.
- The following damage was caused during the tenancy: holes in the walls of the kitchen and small bedroom; and holes in the bathroom and bedroom doors. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
- The amounts ordered are proved.
- The claim to repair the glass in the ranch slider door in the garage at the premises is dismissed. There is evidence (copies of text messages from the tenant to the landlord) that establishes that in December 2023 the glass was broken by a person whom the tenant had dated when he broke into the premises and assaulted the tenant. Ms Loader did not dispute that this event occurred and there is no evidence to support that the tenant had permitted the person to be at the premises at that time. Thus, the damage was not caused carelessly or intentionally by the tenant or any other person at the premises with her permission. The tenant has therefore disproved liability for the damage. Tribunal application fee and previous order
- The landlord has been mostly successful in its claims, and I consider this an appropriate case to award the landlord payment of the Tribunal application fee.
- On 5 November 2025, the Tribunal made an order relating to this tenancy, for rent arrears and the Tribunal application fee. The previous order is incorporated into this order for enforcement purposes.
Topics & place
Topics are dispute themes across the order (not the same as claim-type money lines).
Residential Tenancies Act sections
s3578, s40(1), s40(2)
Key findings
- Dispute theme: cleaning
- Dispute theme: property damage
Property management
Frequently asked questions
Common questions about this Tenancy Tribunal case.
What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5427048?
The tribunal order states: Alicia McCarthy must pay Pure Property Management NZ Ltd and Oaklane
How much money was awarded in case 5427048?
Cleaning: $264.50 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $245.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 5343701 D…: $660.42 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $457.32 awarded to landlord; Walls and Doors: $400.00 awarded to landlord
What type of tenancy dispute was case 5427048?
The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Property damage.
Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5427048?
The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13529063-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.