What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5433469 about?

The tribunal order states: Losaline Tu’atonga and Lusefa Soane must pay Baath Rentals Limited As The

How much money was awarded in case 5433469?

Break Lease Costs: $690.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $6,122.17 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5433469?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5433469?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13590096-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5433469 about?

The tribunal order states: Losaline Tu’atonga and Lusefa Soane must pay Baath Rentals Limited As The

How much money was awarded in case 5433469?

Break Lease Costs: $690.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $6,122.17 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5433469?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5433469?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13590096-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat Flat 6, 134 Station Road, Papatoetoe, Auckland Tenancy Tribunal Case 5433469 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5433469 — net $4,320.17 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 26.3.2026	$6,122.17	Rent arrears to 26.3.2026
Break lease costs	$690.00	Break lease costs
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$4,320.17
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,320.17

Order

Losaline Tu’atonga and Lusefa Soane must pay Baath Rentals Limited As The Agent For Shobna Samita Lal $4,320.17 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,520.00 (BN-00082841) to Baath Rentals Limited As The Agent For Shobna Samita Lal immediately.

All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

Ms Mahoni, representing the landlord, attended the video conference hearing. The tenants did not join the hearing as per the instructions in the Notice of Hearing and so did not attend the hearing. As the tenants were served, the hearing proceeded in their absenc.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, outgoings, refund of the bond and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The landlord said this was a fixed-term tenancy, originally due to expire on 22 April 2026, but which finished early. As the new tenants moved into the property on 27 March 2026, the landlord said the end of this tenancy was on 26 March 2026. The landlord did not know the actual date these tenants moved out but said one of the tenants told them they had moved out “some time ago”. Burden of proof and evidence
The applicant must prove their claim on a balance of probabilities, that is that it is more likely than not that something occurred. This is called the burden of proof.
The issue of evidence at Tenancy Tribunal hearings was considered by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02. Judge Mather stated: “...[the applicant] needs to be reminded that like anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or a Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.”

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

The landlord said the tenancy ended on 26 March 2026. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing to 26 March 2026, the end of the tenancy, which is $6,122.17.
The landlord claimed $562.71 in water bills up to 26 February 2026. The landlord provided a water ledger with a balance of $769.71 but acknowledged they had put a maintenance invoice of $207.00 on the ledger so deducted this from the balance to reach a claim of $562.71 for only water to 26 February 2026.
However, the landlord did not provide any water rates invoices for any of the water rates periods they claimed. As such, I find the landlord has provided insufficient evidence to prove this claim and so dismiss this claim. Compensation – break lease costs
The landlord claimed compensation for break lease costs in the amount of $690.00.
The landlord provided a copy of an email they sent to the tenants on 23 March 2026 setting out the break lease costs incurred by the landlord to end the fixed- term tenancy early. These costs came to $690.00 and involved advertising the property, viewings, administration, to re-let the property. Given the evidence, I find the costs claimed to be reasonable and so award the landlord $690.00 for break lease costs incurred by them in ending the tenancy early.

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. Broken mixer valve
The landlord said the tenant broke a mixer valve at the property. The landlord provided an invoice in the amount of $207.00 dated 12 December 2025 with a narrative that said a mixer valve that was broken was replaced.
In answer to a question from me for more details about the circumstances of this damage, including where in the property it was, the landlord said they were not sure which part of the property had the broken mixer valve. The landlord also acknowledged they were not sure what actual date the tenant left the property, even though they took the end of the tenancy to be 26 March 2026, the day before new tenants moved into the property. The landlord did not provide any additional supporting evidence as to how the mixer valve was broken or any correspondence with the tenant about this, if it was during the tenancy, or any photographs showing it was broken, for example. The landlord said the damage was discovered when the tenancy ended but there were no further details about this provided. Given the lack of any additional supporting evidence for this claim, I find there is insufficient evidence to prove this claim and so dismiss this claim. Filing fee
Because Baath Rentals Limited As The Agent For Shobna Samita Lal has been mostly successful with the claim I reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5433469 — net $4,320.17 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 26.3.2026	$6,122.17	Rent arrears to 26.3.2026
Break lease costs	$690.00	Break lease costs
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$4,320.17
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,320.17

Order

Losaline Tu’atonga and Lusefa Soane must pay Baath Rentals Limited As The Agent For Shobna Samita Lal $4,320.17 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,520.00 (BN-00082841) to Baath Rentals Limited As The Agent For Shobna Samita Lal immediately.

All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

Ms Mahoni, representing the landlord, attended the video conference hearing. The tenants did not join the hearing as per the instructions in the Notice of Hearing and so did not attend the hearing. As the tenants were served, the hearing proceeded in their absenc.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, outgoings, refund of the bond and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The landlord said this was a fixed-term tenancy, originally due to expire on 22 April 2026, but which finished early. As the new tenants moved into the property on 27 March 2026, the landlord said the end of this tenancy was on 26 March 2026. The landlord did not know the actual date these tenants moved out but said one of the tenants told them they had moved out “some time ago”. Burden of proof and evidence
The applicant must prove their claim on a balance of probabilities, that is that it is more likely than not that something occurred. This is called the burden of proof.
The issue of evidence at Tenancy Tribunal hearings was considered by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02. Judge Mather stated: “...[the applicant] needs to be reminded that like anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or a Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.”

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

The landlord said the tenancy ended on 26 March 2026. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing to 26 March 2026, the end of the tenancy, which is $6,122.17.
The landlord claimed $562.71 in water bills up to 26 February 2026. The landlord provided a water ledger with a balance of $769.71 but acknowledged they had put a maintenance invoice of $207.00 on the ledger so deducted this from the balance to reach a claim of $562.71 for only water to 26 February 2026.
However, the landlord did not provide any water rates invoices for any of the water rates periods they claimed. As such, I find the landlord has provided insufficient evidence to prove this claim and so dismiss this claim. Compensation – break lease costs
The landlord claimed compensation for break lease costs in the amount of $690.00.
The landlord provided a copy of an email they sent to the tenants on 23 March 2026 setting out the break lease costs incurred by the landlord to end the fixed- term tenancy early. These costs came to $690.00 and involved advertising the property, viewings, administration, to re-let the property. Given the evidence, I find the costs claimed to be reasonable and so award the landlord $690.00 for break lease costs incurred by them in ending the tenancy early.

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. Broken mixer valve
The landlord said the tenant broke a mixer valve at the property. The landlord provided an invoice in the amount of $207.00 dated 12 December 2025 with a narrative that said a mixer valve that was broken was replaced.
In answer to a question from me for more details about the circumstances of this damage, including where in the property it was, the landlord said they were not sure which part of the property had the broken mixer valve. The landlord also acknowledged they were not sure what actual date the tenant left the property, even though they took the end of the tenancy to be 26 March 2026, the day before new tenants moved into the property. The landlord did not provide any additional supporting evidence as to how the mixer valve was broken or any correspondence with the tenant about this, if it was during the tenancy, or any photographs showing it was broken, for example. The landlord said the damage was discovered when the tenancy ended but there were no further details about this provided. Given the lack of any additional supporting evidence for this claim, I find there is insufficient evidence to prove this claim and so dismiss this claim. Filing fee
Because Baath Rentals Limited As The Agent For Shobna Samita Lal has been mostly successful with the claim I reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5433469 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat Flat 6, 134 Station Road, Papatoetoe, Auckland

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5433469 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat Flat 6, 134 Station Road, Papatoetoe, Auckland

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

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

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions