What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5429700?

The tribunal order states: Alepina Natasha Taeiloa must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities

How much money was awarded in case 5429700?

Cleaning: $741.20 awarded to landlord; Walls: $242.10 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Carpet: $1,440.71 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,087.71 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5429700?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5429700?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13554695-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5429700?

The tribunal order states: Alepina Natasha Taeiloa must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities

How much money was awarded in case 5429700?

Cleaning: $741.20 awarded to landlord; Walls: $242.10 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Carpet: $1,440.71 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,087.71 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5429700?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5429700?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13554695-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

68 Taramea Street, Avondale, Auckland 1026 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5429700 — Cleanliness

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5429700 — net $3,511.72 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning	$741.20	Cleaning
Replace furnishings: Carpet	$1,440.71	Replace furnishings: Carpet
Rubbish removal	$1,087.71	Rubbish removal
Repairs: Walls	$242.10	Repairs: Walls
Net award	$3,511.72
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,511.72

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not attend, and the hearing proceeded in their absence.

The landlord has applied for compensation following the end of the tenancy.

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 (RTA).

The landlord says they were required to carry out cleaning at the property, including general cleaning and specific cleaning to the kitchen rangehood as well as removing and disposing of rubbish in the interior and exterior of the property. They claim $741.20 for cleaning and $1,087.71 for rubbish removal and have provided photographs and evidence of the costs in support of the claims.

On review of the evidence, I am satisfied that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.

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 says that during the tenancy the carpet was damaged through excessive staining, and as a result it required replacement. In addition, they say that there were several holes, or wall damage at the property that required repairs.

Photographs and evidence of costings have been provided in support of the claims.

The landlord seeks $1,440.71 for the depreciated value of the carpet replacement. The actual replacement cost was higher; however, the carpet was not new at the time of the damage and depreciation and betterment has been deducted from the amount sought.

The landlord also seeks $242.10 for the repairs to the walls.

On review of the evidence, I am satisfied that the following damage was caused during the tenancy: Carpet staining and damage to the walls. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The amounts ordered are proved. R Harvey-Lane 07 May 2026

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5429700 — net $3,511.72 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning	$741.20	Cleaning
Replace furnishings: Carpet	$1,440.71	Replace furnishings: Carpet
Rubbish removal	$1,087.71	Rubbish removal
Repairs: Walls	$242.10	Repairs: Walls
Net award	$3,511.72
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,511.72

Order

Alepina Natasha Taeiloa must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities $3,511.72 immediately, as calculated in the table below:

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not attend, and the hearing proceeded in their absence.
The landlord has applied for compensation following the end of the tenancy.

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 (RTA).
The landlord says they were required to carry out cleaning at the property, including general cleaning and specific cleaning to the kitchen rangehood as well as removing and disposing of rubbish in the interior and exterior of the property. They claim $741.20 for cleaning and $1,087.71 for rubbish removal and have provided photographs and evidence of the costs in support of the claims.
On review of the evidence, I am satisfied that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
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 says that during the tenancy the carpet was damaged through excessive staining, and as a result it required replacement. In addition, they say that there were several holes, or wall damage at the property that required repairs.
Photographs and evidence of costings have been provided in support of the claims.
The landlord seeks $1,440.71 for the depreciated value of the carpet replacement. The actual replacement cost was higher; however, the carpet was not new at the time of the damage and depreciation and betterment has been deducted from the amount sought.
The landlord also seeks $242.10 for the repairs to the walls.
On review of the evidence, I am satisfied that the following damage was caused during the tenancy: Carpet staining and damage to the walls. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved. R Harvey-Lane 07 May 2026

Tenancy Tribunal case 5429700 — Cleanliness at 68 Taramea Street, Avondale, Auckland 1026

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5429700 — Cleanliness at 68 Taramea Street, Avondale, Auckland 1026

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

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

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

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

Frequently asked questions