What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5430013 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] must pay

How much money was awarded in case 5430013?

Cleaning: $1,243.20 awarded to landlord; Contribution To Bench Top: $300.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Motorised Gate: $1,250.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $215.05 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $948.95 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,008.25 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $135.51 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5430013?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5430013?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13760169-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5430013 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] must pay

How much money was awarded in case 5430013?

Cleaning: $1,243.20 awarded to landlord; Contribution To Bench Top: $300.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Motorised Gate: $1,250.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $215.05 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $948.95 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,008.25 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $135.51 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5430013?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5430013?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13760169-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

14 Torrington Crescent, Glen Innes, Auckland 1072 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5430013 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5430013 — net $1,528.96 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Water rates	$135.51	3. The landlord has applied for water rates arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
Curtain cleaning	$1,243.20	Curtain cleaning
Window repairs	$215.05	Window repairs
Bi Fold Door repairs	$948.95	Bi Fold Door repairs
Contribution to bench top	$300.00	Contribution to bench top
Bedroom door frame repairs	$1,008.25	Bedroom door frame repairs
Motorised gate	$1,250.00	Motorised gate
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,528.96
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,528.96

[The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] must pay Naturally Keen Limited Trading As Keen On Rentals As The Agent For Rice And [The landlord/s] $1,528.96 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,600.00 (5206264-007) to Naturally Keen Limited Trading As Keen On Rentals As The Agent For Rice And [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

The applicant was represented by Ms keen. The tenant Ms Tipene made herself available however there was no answer when I tried to connect Mr Lindsay to the hearing.

This tenancy was just short of four years.

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

How much is owed for water rates?

The tenancy ended on 8 June 2025. The tenant was unaware of the balance of the water rates. The landlord provided water rates invoices which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.

There was no issue in relation to rent arrears or clean up costs. The application is in relation to some damages, of which the tenant’s dog was responsible.

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.

In this case the landlords insurance does not cover the damages sought given the excess is higher than the amounts claimed, excluding the damages to a motorised gate at the property.

In relation to this gate the tenant confirmed that the gate struggled to open because of the overgrown trees preventing this. However, the claim is in relation to the damage to the gate itself and not the damage caused by the tree which was the motorised part of the gate. The tenant accepted that the dog would get aggravated by neighbouring children. I am satisfied that the damage was caused by repeated actions of the dog and the amount is proven.

The landlord claimed further damage to the Bi-fold doors caused by the dog. The tenant said she bought the initial damage to the attention of the landlord, and it was not fixed at the time so believed it got worse. The landlord did not want to fix it until the dog was no longer at the property. It was damaged due to the dog jumping up at it.

I am satisfied that the damage is more than fair wear and tear and that the tenant was not disproved liability.

The landlord claims the costs of cleaning the three long sets of curtains that contained mould and paint and pen marks. The tenant accepts the marks as she had children however partially blames the mould for the fact that the windows were painted shut. The applicant stated that while one window could not be opened others could and the damage was caused by the amount of furniture stacked against the curtains.

Having heard from the parties and considered the evidence I find that the damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

A kitchen window was also damaged during the tenancy and the tenant accepted responsibility for this.

The landlord further claims damage to the stone bench top that was new when the tenant’s moved in. The damage is staining and cut marks. Clearly careless use. The tenant claims fair wear and tear. As stated, this was a tenancy that lasted just short of four years. I accept that some wear and tear and staining is likely and therefore I make an award for the contribution to the damage rather than the full amount.

The final claim is in relation to the bedroom door, or more so the surrounding frame. The tenant agrees that the door got stuck and they pushed the door open and broke the sounding frame. This was not remedied before the tenant moved out. I accept the amount is proven accordingly.

That concludes all the claims sought.

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.

Because Naturally Keen Limited Trading As Keen On Rentals As The Agent For Rice And [The landlord/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5430013 — net $1,528.96 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Water rates	$135.51	3. The landlord has applied for water rates arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
Curtain cleaning	$1,243.20	Curtain cleaning
Window repairs	$215.05	Window repairs
Bi Fold Door repairs	$948.95	Bi Fold Door repairs
Contribution to bench top	$300.00	Contribution to bench top
Bedroom door frame repairs	$1,008.25	Bedroom door frame repairs
Motorised gate	$1,250.00	Motorised gate
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,528.96
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,528.96

[The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] must pay Naturally Keen Limited Trading As Keen On Rentals As The Agent For Rice And [The landlord/s] $1,528.96 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,600.00 (5206264-007) to Naturally Keen Limited Trading As Keen On Rentals As The Agent For Rice And [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

The applicant was represented by Ms keen. The tenant Ms Tipene made herself available however there was no answer when I tried to connect Mr Lindsay to the hearing.

This tenancy was just short of four years.

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

How much is owed for water rates?

The tenancy ended on 8 June 2025. The tenant was unaware of the balance of the water rates. The landlord provided water rates invoices which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.

There was no issue in relation to rent arrears or clean up costs. The application is in relation to some damages, of which the tenant’s dog was responsible.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

In this case the landlords insurance does not cover the damages sought given the excess is higher than the amounts claimed, excluding the damages to a motorised gate at the property.

I am satisfied that the damage is more than fair wear and tear and that the tenant was not disproved liability.

Having heard from the parties and considered the evidence I find that the damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

A kitchen window was also damaged during the tenancy and the tenant accepted responsibility for this.

That concludes all the claims sought.

Because Naturally Keen Limited Trading As Keen On Rentals As The Agent For Rice And [The landlord/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5430013 — Property damage at 14 Torrington Crescent, Glen Innes, Auckland 1072

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5430013 — Property damage at 14 Torrington Crescent, Glen Innes, Auckland 1072

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for water rates?

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

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for water rates?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions