How much money was awarded in case 5427351?

Cleaning: $160.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $109.25 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Credit: $314.29 awarded to tenant; Wall And Door Frame: $707.25 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5427351?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5427351?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13447412-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5427351?

Cleaning: $160.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $109.25 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Credit: $314.29 awarded to tenant; Wall And Door Frame: $707.25 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5427351?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5427351?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13447412-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

15D East Street, Pukekohe, Pukekohe 2120 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5427351 — Property damage

Q: What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5427351?

The tribunal order states: Kornelis Aaron De Boer to pay Inspire Real Estate Limited As Agent For Karen

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5427351 — net $690.21 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Carpet Cleaning	$160.00		Carpet Cleaning
Repairs: Wall and door frame	$707.25		Repairs: Wall and door frame
Oven/stove cleaning	$109.25		Oven/stove cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00		Filing fee reimbursement
Rent credit		$314.29	Rent credit
Total award	$1,004.50	$314.29
Net award	$690.21
Bond	$2,200.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$690.21

Kornelis Aaron De Boer to pay Inspire Real Estate Limited As Agent For Karen Anne Blennerhassett/ Otium Enterprises Ltd $690.21 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,200.00 (BN-00020772) immediately apportioned as follows: Inspire Real Estate Limited As Agent For Karen Anne Blennerhassett/ Otium Enterprises Ltd: $690.21 Kornelis Aaron De Boer: $1,509.79

All remaining claims are dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing held on 15 April 2026 remotely.

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

The tenancy began on 20 December 2024 and was for a fixed term due to end on 20 February 2026.

On 16 October 2025 the tenant requested that the fixed term tenancy end early. The landlord acknowledged receipt of the request and agreed to begin advertising for a new tenant. The tenant also advertised for a new tenant.

On 24 November 2025 the tenant emailed the landlord stating that he had been advised by an employee of the landlord’s property management company that a new tenant had been found and his move out date was confirmed for 30 November 2025. The tenant asked about his final rent payment and a move out inspection.

On the following day the tenant was advised that the new tenant had fallen though and would not be moving in. The landlord had not arranged for the prospective tenant to sign a tenancy agreement before advising this tenant that there was a new tenancy.

The tenant was told a new tenant had been found and relied on that information to make arrangements to move out. I find that the fixed term tenancy ended by mutual agreement when the tenant was advised of the new tenancy.

The landlord claimed for break lease costs due to the early ending of the fixed term tenancy. When the tenant asked to end the tenancy, the landlord did not inform the tenant of any break lease costs. It was not until the tenant had already moved out that the landlord emailed the tenant with an invoice.

At the hearing the tenant said that if he had known about the break lease costs, he may not have decided to end the tenancy early. He knew that he would be responsible for rent until a new tenant was found but had remained in the premises and continued paying rent until he was advised that a new tenant had been found. He was therefore acting to minimise the cost to him.

It would not be fair to hold the tenant responsible for costs that they were not made aware of before acting. The landlord’s claim for the break lease costs is dismissed.

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 landlord claimed for cleaning the oven and this was agreed to by the tenant.

The landlord claimed the cost of removing a carpet stain. That was also agreed to by the tenant.

The amounts ordered are proved.

After lodging their application, the landlord added a claim for carpet replacement. Only a letter from the insurance company was submitted as evidence. That letter advised that a claim had been accepted for replacement of the carpet in the upstairs second bedroom. The landlord did not produce an invoice for replacement of the carpet.

The photograph in the exit report shows a very small (approximately the size of a 50-cent piece) mark on the carpet. The carpet cleaning invoice states that there are two dark burn marks that can’t be treated. The photographs do not show two marks.

The tenant said that he was not aware that the carpet stain could not be removed and that the carpet needed to be replaced.

Due to the lack of clear evidence this issue was not able to be fully considered at this hearing. The landlord advised that a new application will be filed.

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.

The landlord claimed for damage to the hallway wall and for damage to a door frame. While the tenant had been told that the cost would be minimal, he did not consider the cost sought was reasonable. I have considered the damage and accept that the repair cost is reasonable. The cost sought is awarded.

There was a rent credit when the tenant moved out. That amount is included in the table above together with the release of the bond.

Because Inspire Real Estate Limited As Agent For Karen Anne Blennerhassett/ Otium Enterprises Ltd has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5427351 — net $690.21 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Carpet Cleaning	$160.00		Carpet Cleaning
Repairs: Wall and door frame	$707.25		Repairs: Wall and door frame
Oven/stove cleaning	$109.25		Oven/stove cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00		Filing fee reimbursement
Rent credit		$314.29	Rent credit
Total award	$1,004.50	$314.29
Net award	$690.21
Bond	$2,200.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$690.21

Order

Kornelis Aaron De Boer to pay Inspire Real Estate Limited As Agent For Karen Anne Blennerhassett/ Otium Enterprises Ltd $690.21 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,200.00 (BN-00020772) immediately apportioned as follows: Inspire Real Estate Limited As Agent For Karen Anne Blennerhassett/ Otium Enterprises Ltd: $690.21 Kornelis Aaron De Boer: $1,509.79

All remaining claims are dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing held on 15 April 2026 remotely.
The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The tenancy began on 20 December 2024 and was for a fixed term due to end on 20 February 2026.
On 16 October 2025 the tenant requested that the fixed term tenancy end early. The landlord acknowledged receipt of the request and agreed to begin advertising for a new tenant. The tenant also advertised for a new tenant.
On 24 November 2025 the tenant emailed the landlord stating that he had been advised by an employee of the landlord’s property management company that a new tenant had been found and his move out date was confirmed for 30 November 2025. The tenant asked about his final rent payment and a move out inspection.
On the following day the tenant was advised that the new tenant had fallen though and would not be moving in. The landlord had not arranged for the prospective tenant to sign a tenancy agreement before advising this tenant that there was a new tenancy.
The tenant was told a new tenant had been found and relied on that information to make arrangements to move out. I find that the fixed term tenancy ended by mutual agreement when the tenant was advised of the new tenancy.
The landlord claimed for break lease costs due to the early ending of the fixed term tenancy. When the tenant asked to end the tenancy, the landlord did not inform the tenant of any break lease costs. It was not until the tenant had already moved out that the landlord emailed the tenant with an invoice.
At the hearing the tenant said that if he had known about the break lease costs, he may not have decided to end the tenancy early. He knew that he would be responsible for rent until a new tenant was found but had remained in the premises and continued paying rent until he was advised that a new tenant had been found. He was therefore acting to minimise the cost to him.
It would not be fair to hold the tenant responsible for costs that they were not made aware of before acting. The landlord’s claim for the break lease costs is dismissed.

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 landlord claimed for cleaning the oven and this was agreed to by the tenant.
The landlord claimed the cost of removing a carpet stain. That was also agreed to by the tenant.
The amounts ordered are proved.
After lodging their application, the landlord added a claim for carpet replacement. Only a letter from the insurance company was submitted as evidence. That letter advised that a claim had been accepted for replacement of the carpet in the upstairs second bedroom. The landlord did not produce an invoice for replacement of the carpet.
The photograph in the exit report shows a very small (approximately the size of a 50-cent piece) mark on the carpet. The carpet cleaning invoice states that there are two dark burn marks that can’t be treated. The photographs do not show two marks.
The tenant said that he was not aware that the carpet stain could not be removed and that the carpet needed to be replaced.
Due to the lack of clear evidence this issue was not able to be fully considered at this hearing. The landlord advised that a new application will be filed.

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.
The landlord claimed for damage to the hallway wall and for damage to a door frame. While the tenant had been told that the cost would be minimal, he did not consider the cost sought was reasonable. I have considered the damage and accept that the repair cost is reasonable. The cost sought is awarded.
There was a rent credit when the tenant moved out. That amount is included in the table above together with the release of the bond.
Because Inspire Real Estate Limited As Agent For Karen Anne Blennerhassett/ Otium Enterprises Ltd has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5427351 — Property damage at 15D East Street, Pukekohe, Pukekohe 2120

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5427351 — Property damage at 15D East Street, Pukekohe, Pukekohe 2120

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions