What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5429413?

The tribunal order states: Gina Collins to pay Irelands Real Estate Limited As Agent For William Foster

How much money was awarded in case 5429413?

Cleaning: $280.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Painting (Reduced: $575.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $264.99 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $673.16 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5429413?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5429413?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13291011-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5429413?

The tribunal order states: Gina Collins to pay Irelands Real Estate Limited As Agent For William Foster

How much money was awarded in case 5429413?

Cleaning: $280.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Painting (Reduced: $575.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $264.99 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $673.16 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5429413?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5429413?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13291011-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

2 Will Place, Rangiora, Rangiora 7400 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5429413 — Property damage

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5429413 — net $1,821.15 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning	$280.00	Cleaning
Window repairs: Glass replacement	$673.16	Window repairs: Glass replacement
Repairs: Painting (reduced	$575.00	Repairs: Painting (reduced
Rubbish removal	$264.99	Rubbish removal
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,821.15
Bond	$2,280.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,821.15

Order

Gina Collins to pay Irelands Real Estate Limited As Agent For William Foster $1,821.15 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,280.00 (3273152-003) immediately apportioned as follows: Irelands Real Estate Limited As Agent For William Foster: $1,821.15 Gina Collins: $458.85

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing via remote teleconference.
The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The tenancy started on 28 October 2022 and ended on 1 December 2025. The tenant resided at the premises with her 5 young children.

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 tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The landlord claims that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
The landlord provided incoming and outgoing inspection reports along with associated photographic evidence. The outgoing photographs clearly show that the premises were not left reasonably clean and tidy. There is also evidence of personal belongings and rubbish left behind at the end of the tenancy.
Based on the evidence filed by the landlord I am satisfied that the claims for cleaning and rubbish removal are established. The amounts claimed are reasonable.
The amounts ordered are proved.

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 careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.
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 landlord claims the following damage was caused during the tenancy: damage to blinds, walls and glass. Blinds
The landlord claims that the tenant damaged a set of roller blinds. Photographs of the damaged blind were provided with the landlord’s application. There were no photographs provided of the blinds taken at the start of the tenancy although the landlord states that the blinds are recorded in the inspection report as being in good condition.
The tenant does not accept this claim.
In the absence of photographic evidence which confirms the actual condition of the blinds at the start of the tenancy I find that, on the balance of probabilities I am unable to properly assess whether the tenant is responsible for the alleged damage. At the very least I would have expected photographic evidence which shows the condition of the blinds at the start of the tenancy. There is also no evidence of the age of the blinds.
Accordingly, the claim for blind replacement is dismissed. Glass replacement
The landlord claims that the tenant damaged a glass panel in the ranch slider set of windows. The landlord provided photographic evidence of the damage along with an invoice for the amount claimed.
The tenant accepts that one of her children damaged the glass.
Based on the evidence provided, along with the tenant’s explanation I find this claim proven. I also find that the damage is accidental and not intentional.
The claim for glass replacement is established. Painting
The landlord claims compensation for damage to various walls throughout the premises. Photographic evidence was provided confirming the condition of the walls at the start and end of the tenancy. The landlord also provided an invoice for the amount claimed.
The tenant accepts a degree of responsibility for the damage.
I have carefully considered the incoming and outgoing evidence provided by the landlord in respect of this claim. The incoming evidence clearly confirms that the walls were not perfect at the time the tenant moved into the address. There are small areas of various walls which have been plastered over. The invoice provided by the landlord also only refers to ‘selected areas viewed from photos’. The invoice does not clearly state which areas of the house required painting.
Having regard to the tenant’s acceptance of some liability, along with the photographic evidence provided by the landlord I find the claim proven, however the amount claimed is simply not supported by the evidence. I also take into account the condition of the walls at the start of the tenancy.
I also reduce the invoice amount by $150.00 in respect of the reference to curtain track holes and damage to walls caused by no door stops. There is no evidence before me which suggests that the tenant is responsible for this damage.
Accordingly, I allow the claim but reduce the amount awarded of $1150.00 (including GST) by 50% as a fair reflection of the damage caused by the tenant.
Because Irelands Real Estate Limited As Agent For William Foster has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5429413 — net $1,821.15 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning	$280.00	Cleaning
Window repairs: Glass replacement	$673.16	Window repairs: Glass replacement
Repairs: Painting (reduced	$575.00	Repairs: Painting (reduced
Rubbish removal	$264.99	Rubbish removal
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,821.15
Bond	$2,280.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,821.15

Order

Gina Collins to pay Irelands Real Estate Limited As Agent For William Foster $1,821.15 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,280.00 (3273152-003) immediately apportioned as follows: Irelands Real Estate Limited As Agent For William Foster: $1,821.15 Gina Collins: $458.85

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing via remote teleconference.
The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The tenancy started on 28 October 2022 and ended on 1 December 2025. The tenant resided at the premises with her 5 young children.

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 tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The landlord claims that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
The landlord provided incoming and outgoing inspection reports along with associated photographic evidence. The outgoing photographs clearly show that the premises were not left reasonably clean and tidy. There is also evidence of personal belongings and rubbish left behind at the end of the tenancy.
Based on the evidence filed by the landlord I am satisfied that the claims for cleaning and rubbish removal are established. The amounts claimed are reasonable.
The amounts ordered are proved.

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 careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.
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 landlord claims the following damage was caused during the tenancy: damage to blinds, walls and glass. Blinds
The landlord claims that the tenant damaged a set of roller blinds. Photographs of the damaged blind were provided with the landlord’s application. There were no photographs provided of the blinds taken at the start of the tenancy although the landlord states that the blinds are recorded in the inspection report as being in good condition.
The tenant does not accept this claim.
In the absence of photographic evidence which confirms the actual condition of the blinds at the start of the tenancy I find that, on the balance of probabilities I am unable to properly assess whether the tenant is responsible for the alleged damage. At the very least I would have expected photographic evidence which shows the condition of the blinds at the start of the tenancy. There is also no evidence of the age of the blinds.
Accordingly, the claim for blind replacement is dismissed. Glass replacement
The landlord claims that the tenant damaged a glass panel in the ranch slider set of windows. The landlord provided photographic evidence of the damage along with an invoice for the amount claimed.
The tenant accepts that one of her children damaged the glass.
Based on the evidence provided, along with the tenant’s explanation I find this claim proven. I also find that the damage is accidental and not intentional.
The claim for glass replacement is established. Painting
The landlord claims compensation for damage to various walls throughout the premises. Photographic evidence was provided confirming the condition of the walls at the start and end of the tenancy. The landlord also provided an invoice for the amount claimed.
The tenant accepts a degree of responsibility for the damage.
I have carefully considered the incoming and outgoing evidence provided by the landlord in respect of this claim. The incoming evidence clearly confirms that the walls were not perfect at the time the tenant moved into the address. There are small areas of various walls which have been plastered over. The invoice provided by the landlord also only refers to ‘selected areas viewed from photos’. The invoice does not clearly state which areas of the house required painting.
Having regard to the tenant’s acceptance of some liability, along with the photographic evidence provided by the landlord I find the claim proven, however the amount claimed is simply not supported by the evidence. I also take into account the condition of the walls at the start of the tenancy.
I also reduce the invoice amount by $150.00 in respect of the reference to curtain track holes and damage to walls caused by no door stops. There is no evidence before me which suggests that the tenant is responsible for this damage.
Accordingly, I allow the claim but reduce the amount awarded of $1150.00 (including GST) by 50% as a fair reflection of the damage caused by the tenant.
Because Irelands Real Estate Limited As Agent For William Foster has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5429413 — Property damage at 2 Will Place, Rangiora, Rangiora 7400

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5429413 — Property damage at 2 Will Place, Rangiora, Rangiora 7400

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