Published tribunal order
Tenancy Tribunal case 5436931 — Cleanliness at Unit/Flat Unit 605B, 123 Taranaki Street, Te Aro, Wellington
Published 28 May 2026 · Application 5436931
Mixed / unclear
- Cleanliness
- Property damage
Order
- Sam Phelps-Barber is to pay the sum of $425.00 to Oxygen.Co.NZ limited immediately.
Reasons
Background:
- Both parties attended the hearing by the remote registry.
- The background to this case is that the tenancy was one that lasted just short of four years.
- When the tenancy ended the landlord claimed for cleaning costs along with other costs. The case went to mediation and all matters were resolved excluding the cleaning costs.
- The tenant disputes the amount of the cleaning costs. At mediation it was agreed that the landlord would contribute to some of the costs and the remaining outstanding invoice of $425.00 is before me for consideration.
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 landlord claims for a cleaning invoice of $575.00. The tenant claims that this is excessive, and he is not prepared to pay that amount.
- The amount of the invoice agreed to was reduced to $425 for the purposes of this hearing. I am therefore required to determine if that amount is reasonable.
- The tenant claimed that the clean included the ‘exhaust fan’ and heat pump. He stated this was not necessary and over and above what he is legally required to clean. He stated that when he googled the company that the package the landlord purchased included cleaning those items. However, that is no longer on the website, and I have no evidence that it did include the excessive cleaning of these items that the tenant claims.
- The tenant was also under the understanding that the exit inspection report was given to the cleaner for them to clean parts of the dishwasher and appliances, however this was incorrect.
- The tenant did not provide evidence of other alternative cleaning companies that could have carried out the work at a lesser rate.
- The invoice shows the ‘deep clean’ cost $240, carpet cleaning was $180.00 and the remainder was for travel parking and GST.
- The tenant claims that that is excessive for a one-bedroom apartment. The apartment had a bathroom, kitchen and small entrance. However, he has not produced independent evidence to show what should have been a reasonable cost.
- Whilst the tenant points to some issues in the exit inspection report, this was not made available to the cleaner requesting them to clean all items photographed. The photo evidence produced by the respondent showed that it was not unreasonable to have the carpet cleaned given some stains existed. It was not unreasonable to have the fridge cleaned out and the walls and doors wiped down to remove what had been spilt. Whilst the tenant claimed it was probability residue from his cleaning products he used, they still required a wipe. The toilet also required a better clean to re tenant the property.
- Having considered all of the evidence and submissions from both parties I find on the balance of probabilities that the cleaning was reasonable and therefore the invoice is due and owing.
- The reduced amount of the invoice of $425.00 is therefore proven and ordered.