What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5438333 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

How much money was awarded in case 5438333?

Cleaning: $700.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5438333?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5438333?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13680868-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5438333 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

How much money was awarded in case 5438333?

Cleaning: $700.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5438333?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5438333?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13680868-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5438333 — Cleanliness

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5438333 — net $728.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: Cleaning	$700.00	Cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$728.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$728.00

Both parties attended the hearing. The landlords had a representative attend on their behalf.

The tenancy commenced in January 2026 and remains ongoing.

The tenants have applied for compensation on the basis that at the commencement of the tenancy, the property was not provided in a reasonable state of cleanliness. They say that there was extensive post-construction dust throughout the property, dirty bathrooms, unclean floors and food residue in the kitchen (including in the fridge, microwave and cupboards). They also raised concerns about the likely health impacts of the builder’s dust.

The tenants claim $700.00 for cleaning and a rent abatement for both the upstairs and downstairs of the property totalling $1,284.31. This is calculated at three days for the upstairs portion of the property of $621.45 and eight days for the downstairs portion of the property of $662.86.

The landlord accepts that the property was not provided in a perfect condition, but disputes it was a construction site with renovations having been completed months earlier.

Both parties have provided evidence, and I confirm that I have reviewed and considered this, even if there is no direct reference. Discussion Cleaning

Section 45(1)(a) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) requires the landlord to provide the premises in a reasonable state of cleanliness at the start of the tenancy.

Failure to do so is a breach of the landlord’s obligations.

The tenants say they spent around three days cleaning the upstairs of the premises and claim $700.00 for their time and effort to do so. Cleaning was arranged for the downstairs of the property directly by the landlord.

The landlord does not dispute that the property could have been cleaner, however, the amount is disputed and considered by the landlord to be excessive.

Having reviewed the photographic evidence and the extent of the work required, I am satisfied that cleaning was necessary and that the amount claimed reasonably reflects the work required. There was no requirement for the tenants to provide the landlord time to remedy the issue, and they appear to have acted reasonably in the circumstances.

The landlord is ordered to pay the tenants $700.00 as compensation for the cleaning required to meet the statutory threshold. Rent abatement

Under section 59 of the RTA, a rent abatement is available where the premises are so seriously damaged as to be uninhabitable.

This provision is directed at loss caused by serious physical damage. For example, fire, flooding and major structural failure.

Dirtiness or poor cleaning, including builders’ dust, even if below an acceptable standard as identified above, does not render premises uninhabitable in the s59 sense.

Although I accept the tenants’ concerns about the property (and the alleged construction dust), I do not consider that the evidence shows that the property was so seriously damaged as to be uninhabitable.

As a result, the claim for rent abatement is dismissed. Other matters

As [The applicant/s] have substantially succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

During the hearing, both parties sought name suppression. As both parties have had some level of success, this is granted. See section 95A of the RTA. R Harvey-Lane 31 May 2026

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5438333 — net $728.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: Cleaning	$700.00	Cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$728.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$728.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlords’ and tenants’ name and identifying details.
[The landlord/s] must pay [The tenant/s] $728.00 immediately, as calculated in the table below:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The landlords had a representative attend on their behalf.
The tenancy commenced in January 2026 and remains ongoing.
The tenants have applied for compensation on the basis that at the commencement of the tenancy, the property was not provided in a reasonable state of cleanliness. They say that there was extensive post-construction dust throughout the property, dirty bathrooms, unclean floors and food residue in the kitchen (including in the fridge, microwave and cupboards). They also raised concerns about the likely health impacts of the builder’s dust.
The tenants claim $700.00 for cleaning and a rent abatement for both the upstairs and downstairs of the property totalling $1,284.31. This is calculated at three days for the upstairs portion of the property of $621.45 and eight days for the downstairs portion of the property of $662.86.
The landlord accepts that the property was not provided in a perfect condition, but disputes it was a construction site with renovations having been completed months earlier.
Both parties have provided evidence, and I confirm that I have reviewed and considered this, even if there is no direct reference. Discussion Cleaning
Section 45(1)(a) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) requires the landlord to provide the premises in a reasonable state of cleanliness at the start of the tenancy.
Failure to do so is a breach of the landlord’s obligations.
The tenants say they spent around three days cleaning the upstairs of the premises and claim $700.00 for their time and effort to do so. Cleaning was arranged for the downstairs of the property directly by the landlord.
The landlord does not dispute that the property could have been cleaner, however, the amount is disputed and considered by the landlord to be excessive.
Having reviewed the photographic evidence and the extent of the work required, I am satisfied that cleaning was necessary and that the amount claimed reasonably reflects the work required. There was no requirement for the tenants to provide the landlord time to remedy the issue, and they appear to have acted reasonably in the circumstances.
The landlord is ordered to pay the tenants $700.00 as compensation for the cleaning required to meet the statutory threshold. Rent abatement
Under section 59 of the RTA, a rent abatement is available where the premises are so seriously damaged as to be uninhabitable.
This provision is directed at loss caused by serious physical damage. For example, fire, flooding and major structural failure.
Dirtiness or poor cleaning, including builders’ dust, even if below an acceptable standard as identified above, does not render premises uninhabitable in the s59 sense.
Although I accept the tenants’ concerns about the property (and the alleged construction dust), I do not consider that the evidence shows that the property was so seriously damaged as to be uninhabitable.
As a result, the claim for rent abatement is dismissed. Other matters
As [The applicant/s] have substantially succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
During the hearing, both parties sought name suppression. As both parties have had some level of success, this is granted. See section 95A of the RTA. R Harvey-Lane 31 May 2026

Tenancy Tribunal case 5438333 — Cleanliness

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5438333 — Cleanliness

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions