What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5435198 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] must pay Te Ahuru Mowai Limited Partnership

How much money was awarded in case 5435198?

Cleaning: $168.44 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $1,904.97 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $1,345.22 awarded to landlord; Hole In Wall: $36.52 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $228.80 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5435198?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5435198?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13765777-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5435198 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] must pay Te Ahuru Mowai Limited Partnership

How much money was awarded in case 5435198?

Cleaning: $168.44 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $1,904.97 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $1,345.22 awarded to landlord; Hole In Wall: $36.52 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $228.80 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5435198?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5435198?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13765777-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

46 Bell Street, Tawa, Wellington 5028 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5435198 — Cleanliness

Tenantcheck Insights

46 Bell Street, Tawa, Wellington 5028 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5435198 — Cleanliness | TenantCheck

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5435198 — net $3,407.95 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rubbish removal	$228.80	Rubbish removal
Oven/stove cleaning	$168.44	Oven/stove cleaning
Lawns and Garden work: Mowing	$1,904.97	Lawns and Garden work: Mowing
Lawns and Garden work: Removal of grass clippings	$1,345.22	Lawns and Garden work: Removal of grass clippings
Repairs: Hole in wall	$36.52	Repairs: Hole in wall
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,407.95
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,407.95

Claims and awards for application 5435198 — net $3,407.95 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rubbish removal

Amount: $228.80
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal

Oven/stove cleaning

Amount: $168.44
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Oven/stove cleaning

Lawns and Garden work: Mowing

Amount: $1,904.97
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lawns and Garden work: Mowing

Lawns and Garden work: Removal of grass clippings

Amount: $1,345.22
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lawns and Garden work: Removal of grass clippings

Repairs: Hole in wall

Amount: $36.52
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Hole in wall

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Filing Fee Lawns And Garden Work Property damage Rubbish Removal

Order

[The tenant/s] must pay Te Ahuru Mowai Limited Partnership $3,407.95 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $304.00 (3111093-013) to Te Ahuru Mowai Limited Partnership immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing on 17 June 2026. The tenant did not attend.
The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
As the applicant, the landlord must prove their claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.

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

The law

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. 1
“Reasonably” clean means clean to the standard an average, reasonable bystander would consider reasonable. 2 It does not mean commercially clean, 3 spotless 4 or to a hotel or motel standard. 5 The better the premises and the higher the rent payable, the higher the standard expected. 6
The term “premises” includes “any land and appurtenances, other than facilities.” 7 The obligation to leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy relates to the inside and outside of the premises. Oven
The photographs taken at the end of the tenancy prove the tenant did not leave the premises, including the oven, reasonably clean and tidy. There is dirt and debris on the floors, which do not appear to have been vacuumed or mopped. The oven is dirty and has not been cleaned.
Fortunately for the tenant, the landlord only seeks compensation to clean the oven, not the entire house. The landlord submitted an invoice for $168.44 to clean the oven. The landlord’s claim for compensation is granted in full for this amount. 1 Residential Tenancies Act 1986, section 40(1)(e)(ii) – (v). 2 Housing New Zealand v Holloway NZTT Auckland TT215/93, 8 February 1993 at [8]. 3 Mills v Kiwi Property Care Ltd NZTT Auckland TT215/93, 8 February 1993 at [8]. 4 Chang v Driscoll NZTT Christchurch TT2043/98, 21 July 1998 at [6]. 5 Richards v Scully NZTT Christchurch TT858/97, 8 May 1997 at [3]; Chang v Driscoll NZTT Christchurch TT2043/98, 21 July 1998 at [6]. 6 Westwood v Western [1994] DCR 759 at [770]. 7 Residential Tenancies Act 1986, section 2. Rubbish removal
The photographs taken at the end of the tenancy prove the tenant did not removal all rubbish. The inside of wardrobes and the garage are full of rubbish and personal belongings. Rubbish is also scattered throughout the lawn.
The landlord’s claim for compensation for rubbish removal is granted for $228.80. The landlord submitted an invoice for this amount. Lawns
The photographs taken at the end of the tenancy show the lawns are very overgrown. They are the most overgrown lawns I have seen to date. There is a metal washing line in the back yard. The lawns are almost as high as the washing line. For this reason, I find the tenant did not leave the outside of the premises reasonably clean and tidy.
The landlord submitted invoices for the following amounts: a. Yard/garden labour: $1,904.97 b. Dispose clippings: $1,345.22
The amounts sought are high however, they reasonably reflect the extent of work required to bring the lawn back to a reasonably clean and tidy condition. I also note that the size of the lawn is relatively large.
The landlord’s claim for compensation is granted for $1,904.97 to cut the lawns and $1,345.22 to dispose of the clippings.

Is the tenant responsible for damage to the premises during the tenancy?

The law

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. 8
Fair wear and tear has been defined as the deterioration of premises due to both reasonable use and ordinary operation of natural forces, reasonable conduct on the part of the tenant being assumed. The amount of damage is not relevant. 9 8 Residential Tenancies Act 1986, sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B. 9 See discussion in Accessible Properties New Zealand Ltd v McKeefry [2019] NZTT 4114629, 4169403. Analysis
The photographs taken at the beginning of the tenancy show the walls in bedroom 3 to be in good condition with no obvious holes. In contrast, the photographs taken at the end show a hole in the wall of bedroom 3. The hole is approximately 2 – 4 cm wide.
I find the hole occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. The tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord submitted an invoice for $36.52 to repair the hole. Their claim for compensation is granted for this amount.
All of the amounts ordered are proved.
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. In calculating depreciation, I have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Filing fee
Because Te Ahuru Mowai Limited Partnership has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5435198 — net $3,407.95 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rubbish removal	$228.80	Rubbish removal
Oven/stove cleaning	$168.44	Oven/stove cleaning
Lawns and Garden work: Mowing	$1,904.97	Lawns and Garden work: Mowing
Lawns and Garden work: Removal of grass clippings	$1,345.22	Lawns and Garden work: Removal of grass clippings
Repairs: Hole in wall	$36.52	Repairs: Hole in wall
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,407.95
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,407.95

Claims and awards for application 5435198 — net $3,407.95 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rubbish removal

Amount: $228.80
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rubbish removal

Oven/stove cleaning

Amount: $168.44
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Oven/stove cleaning

Lawns and Garden work: Mowing

Amount: $1,904.97
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lawns and Garden work: Mowing

Lawns and Garden work: Removal of grass clippings

Amount: $1,345.22
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lawns and Garden work: Removal of grass clippings

Repairs: Hole in wall

Amount: $36.52
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Hole in wall

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Cleanliness Filing Fee Lawns And Garden Work Property damage Rubbish Removal

Order

[The tenant/s] must pay Te Ahuru Mowai Limited Partnership $3,407.95 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $304.00 (3111093-013) to Te Ahuru Mowai Limited Partnership immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing on 17 June 2026. The tenant did not attend.
The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
As the applicant, the landlord must prove their claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.

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

The law

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. 1
“Reasonably” clean means clean to the standard an average, reasonable bystander would consider reasonable. 2 It does not mean commercially clean, 3 spotless 4 or to a hotel or motel standard. 5 The better the premises and the higher the rent payable, the higher the standard expected. 6
The term “premises” includes “any land and appurtenances, other than facilities.” 7 The obligation to leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy relates to the inside and outside of the premises. Oven
The photographs taken at the end of the tenancy prove the tenant did not leave the premises, including the oven, reasonably clean and tidy. There is dirt and debris on the floors, which do not appear to have been vacuumed or mopped. The oven is dirty and has not been cleaned.
Fortunately for the tenant, the landlord only seeks compensation to clean the oven, not the entire house. The landlord submitted an invoice for $168.44 to clean the oven. The landlord’s claim for compensation is granted in full for this amount. 1 Residential Tenancies Act 1986, section 40(1)(e)(ii) – (v). 2 Housing New Zealand v Holloway NZTT Auckland TT215/93, 8 February 1993 at [8]. 3 Mills v Kiwi Property Care Ltd NZTT Auckland TT215/93, 8 February 1993 at [8]. 4 Chang v Driscoll NZTT Christchurch TT2043/98, 21 July 1998 at [6]. 5 Richards v Scully NZTT Christchurch TT858/97, 8 May 1997 at [3]; Chang v Driscoll NZTT Christchurch TT2043/98, 21 July 1998 at [6]. 6 Westwood v Western [1994] DCR 759 at [770]. 7 Residential Tenancies Act 1986, section 2. Rubbish removal
The photographs taken at the end of the tenancy prove the tenant did not removal all rubbish. The inside of wardrobes and the garage are full of rubbish and personal belongings. Rubbish is also scattered throughout the lawn.
The landlord’s claim for compensation for rubbish removal is granted for $228.80. The landlord submitted an invoice for this amount. Lawns
The photographs taken at the end of the tenancy show the lawns are very overgrown. They are the most overgrown lawns I have seen to date. There is a metal washing line in the back yard. The lawns are almost as high as the washing line. For this reason, I find the tenant did not leave the outside of the premises reasonably clean and tidy.
The landlord submitted invoices for the following amounts: a. Yard/garden labour: $1,904.97 b. Dispose clippings: $1,345.22
The amounts sought are high however, they reasonably reflect the extent of work required to bring the lawn back to a reasonably clean and tidy condition. I also note that the size of the lawn is relatively large.
The landlord’s claim for compensation is granted for $1,904.97 to cut the lawns and $1,345.22 to dispose of the clippings.

Is the tenant responsible for damage to the premises during the tenancy?

The law

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. 8
Fair wear and tear has been defined as the deterioration of premises due to both reasonable use and ordinary operation of natural forces, reasonable conduct on the part of the tenant being assumed. The amount of damage is not relevant. 9 8 Residential Tenancies Act 1986, sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B. 9 See discussion in Accessible Properties New Zealand Ltd v McKeefry [2019] NZTT 4114629, 4169403. Analysis
The photographs taken at the beginning of the tenancy show the walls in bedroom 3 to be in good condition with no obvious holes. In contrast, the photographs taken at the end show a hole in the wall of bedroom 3. The hole is approximately 2 – 4 cm wide.
I find the hole occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. The tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord submitted an invoice for $36.52 to repair the hole. Their claim for compensation is granted for this amount.
All of the amounts ordered are proved.
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. In calculating depreciation, I have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Filing fee
Because Te Ahuru Mowai Limited Partnership has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5435198 — Cleanliness at 46 Bell Street, Tawa, Wellington 5028

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5435198 — Cleanliness at 46 Bell Street, Tawa, Wellington 5028

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 damage to the premises during the tenancy?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

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 damage to the premises during the tenancy?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions