What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5438103 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 5438103?

Individual award amounts are in the official MoJ PDF. Claim amounts appear on this page when claims and net totals reconcile.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5438103?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness, Property damage, Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5438103?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13423974-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5438103 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 5438103?

Individual award amounts are in the official MoJ PDF. Claim amounts appear on this page when claims and net totals reconcile.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5438103?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness, Property damage, Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5438103?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13423974-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

47 Golf Links Road, Shirley, Christchurch 8061 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5438103 — Rent arrears

Order

[The tenant/s] tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] tenant/s] must pay Harcourts Gold Property Management Limited as agent for Dyuthith Rethnalayam and [The tenant/s] landlord/s] $9,771.11 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:
The application for exemplary damages for unlawful sub-letting is dismissed.

Reasons

Mr Christiansen represented the landlord. The tenants did not attend the hearing.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, exemplary damages, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The landlord has recently received the bond.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy was ended by Tribunal order dated 1 December 2025 for abandonment. The tenancy was a fixed term tenancy to 20 September 2026. The tenants remain liable for rent to 22 January 2026 after which a new tenancy started.

Did the tenants 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 1 .
The tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. A large amount of rubbish had to be removed.
The tenants did not return the keys.
A range element was missing at the end of the tenancy. 1 See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA)

Are the tenants 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 2 .
The following damage was caused during the tenancy. There was pet damage to the laundry wall and to vinyl and carpet by the laundry/hall. Some light fittings were damaged. There was general damage throughout the premises – the toilet seat, letterbox, fibre box, curtains had been removed.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenants have not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved by invoices and photos and by the evidence Mr Christiansen gave. I have considered betterment and depreciation. For the carpet and vinyl replacement claim I have applied a 66% depreciation to account for the age and condition of those chattels - they were probably around 10 years old. The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenants not breached their obligations and should not be better or worse off. Exemplary damages
Abandoning a tenancy without reasonable excuse while the rent is in arrears is an unlawful act 3 .
The maximum amount of exemplary damages for this unlawful act is $1,500.00 4 . The Tribunal seldom, if ever, awards the maximum.
Exemplary damages designed to punish and to deter. They are like a fine.
Exemplary damages are awarded at the Tribunal’s discretion when one party has proved that the other party has committed a defined unlawful act. If that is proven, and before the Tribunal may award exemplary damages, it must consider the following factors 5 : • The intention of the person; 2 See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA 3 See section 61(5) RTA 4 See Schedule 1A RTA 5 See section 109 RTA • The effect of the unlawful act; • The interests of the party against whom the unlawful act was committed; and • The public interest.
I find that the tenants intended to abandon the tenancy. They then arranged for another person to move in without the landlord’s consent.
The person whom they invited into the tenancy would not leave and the landlord had to enforce the possession order the Tribunal made on 1 December 2025.
The abandonment of the tenancy had an effect on the landlord and was against the landlord’s interests. The premises were left in a bad condition and the landlord was denied rent. It is against the public interest for tenants not to meet their statutory responsibilities.
For this unlawful act, I award the landlord exemplary damages of $500.00.
The landlord also sought exemplary damages for the tenants unlawfully sub- letting the tenancy. I do not find this claim proved.
Inviting another person into the tenancy and then abandoning it does not necessarily amount to subletting. It might be a breach of the tenancy agreement, but sub-letting is usually evidenced by the tenants entering a sub- tenancy with another party, where the tenants become the sub-landlord. That did not occur here. The tenants simply abandoned the tenancy, and another person remained in possession when they had no lawful right to be there. I dismiss this part of the landlord’s application. Result
After the deduction of the bond which the landlord has now received, the tenants will pay the landlord $9,711.11 which includes reimbursement of the filing fee on the successful application.

Order

[The tenant/s] tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] tenant/s] must pay Harcourts Gold Property Management Limited as agent for Dyuthith Rethnalayam and [The tenant/s] landlord/s] $9,771.11 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:
The application for exemplary damages for unlawful sub-letting is dismissed.

Reasons

Mr Christiansen represented the landlord. The tenants did not attend the hearing.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, exemplary damages, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The landlord has recently received the bond.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy was ended by Tribunal order dated 1 December 2025 for abandonment. The tenancy was a fixed term tenancy to 20 September 2026. The tenants remain liable for rent to 22 January 2026 after which a new tenancy started.

Did the tenants 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 1 .
The tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. A large amount of rubbish had to be removed.
The tenants did not return the keys.
A range element was missing at the end of the tenancy. 1 See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA)

Are the tenants 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 2 .
The following damage was caused during the tenancy. There was pet damage to the laundry wall and to vinyl and carpet by the laundry/hall. Some light fittings were damaged. There was general damage throughout the premises – the toilet seat, letterbox, fibre box, curtains had been removed.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenants have not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved by invoices and photos and by the evidence Mr Christiansen gave. I have considered betterment and depreciation. For the carpet and vinyl replacement claim I have applied a 66% depreciation to account for the age and condition of those chattels - they were probably around 10 years old. The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenants not breached their obligations and should not be better or worse off. Exemplary damages
Abandoning a tenancy without reasonable excuse while the rent is in arrears is an unlawful act 3 .
The maximum amount of exemplary damages for this unlawful act is $1,500.00 4 . The Tribunal seldom, if ever, awards the maximum.
Exemplary damages designed to punish and to deter. They are like a fine.
Exemplary damages are awarded at the Tribunal’s discretion when one party has proved that the other party has committed a defined unlawful act. If that is proven, and before the Tribunal may award exemplary damages, it must consider the following factors 5 : • The intention of the person; 2 See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA 3 See section 61(5) RTA 4 See Schedule 1A RTA 5 See section 109 RTA • The effect of the unlawful act; • The interests of the party against whom the unlawful act was committed; and • The public interest.
I find that the tenants intended to abandon the tenancy. They then arranged for another person to move in without the landlord’s consent.
The person whom they invited into the tenancy would not leave and the landlord had to enforce the possession order the Tribunal made on 1 December 2025.
The abandonment of the tenancy had an effect on the landlord and was against the landlord’s interests. The premises were left in a bad condition and the landlord was denied rent. It is against the public interest for tenants not to meet their statutory responsibilities.
For this unlawful act, I award the landlord exemplary damages of $500.00.
The landlord also sought exemplary damages for the tenants unlawfully sub- letting the tenancy. I do not find this claim proved.
Inviting another person into the tenancy and then abandoning it does not necessarily amount to subletting. It might be a breach of the tenancy agreement, but sub-letting is usually evidenced by the tenants entering a sub- tenancy with another party, where the tenants become the sub-landlord. That did not occur here. The tenants simply abandoned the tenancy, and another person remained in possession when they had no lawful right to be there. I dismiss this part of the landlord’s application. Result
After the deduction of the bond which the landlord has now received, the tenants will pay the landlord $9,711.11 which includes reimbursement of the filing fee on the successful application.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5438103 — Rent arrears at 47 Golf Links Road, Shirley, Christchurch 8061

Tenancy Tribunal case 5438103 — Rent arrears at 47 Golf Links Road, Shirley, Christchurch 8061

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

Are the tenants responsible for the damage to the premises?

Property management

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

Are the tenants responsible for the damage to the premises?

Property management

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.