What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5439562 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] must pay [The landlord/s] $963.75 immediately, calculated as

How much money was awarded in case 5439562?

Cleaning: $250.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Garage Remote: $110.75 awarded to landlord; Bathroom Door: $230.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $345.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5439562?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5439562?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13833893-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5439562 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] must pay [The landlord/s] $963.75 immediately, calculated as

How much money was awarded in case 5439562?

Cleaning: $250.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Garage Remote: $110.75 awarded to landlord; Bathroom Door: $230.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $345.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5439562?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5439562?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13833893-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

19 Farnol Street, Hillsborough, Auckland 1042 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5439562 — Property damage

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5439562 — net $963.75 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning	$250.00	Cleaning
Garage remote	$110.75	Garage remote
Repairs: Bathroom door	$230.00	Repairs: Bathroom door
Repairs: Wall damage	$345.00	Repairs: Wall damage
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$963.75
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$963.75

Both parties attended the hearing held on 1 July 2026 by video.

The tenancy began on 4 July 2020 and ended on 8 February 2026.

The landlord had provided an unsigned tenancy agreement with his application. During the hearing he provided a signed agreement which named a further four tenants. In 2024 there was a change to the tenants where four tenants remained. The tenant advised that at the end of the tenancy there were three tenants.

I note that the Bond Centre had the names of all the tenants. The application was only served on one tenant, but I am satisfied that he represents all the tenants remaining at the end of the tenancy because he has been in contact with them recently as the bond was released to the tenants in March 2026.

The landlord has applied for compensation following the end of the tenancy.

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 tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy. I refer to the photographs produced by the landlord. I consider that further cleaning was required in respect of the oven, a toilet and a door. I have reduced the landlord claim and award $250.00.

The tenant acknowledged that one garage door remote was not returned at the end of the tenancy. The landlord produced a quote with two amounts, one for supplying the remote which would need to be coded (instructions would be provided) and the other where the contractor attends to supply and code the remote. I don’t think it is too difficult for the landlord to code the remote with the instructions provided. Therefore, I award the lesser amount of $110.75.

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.

The tenant acknowledged damage to one door and a wall which had been repaired but needed painting.

The landlord had produced a quote for the repair, but the invoice was not clear what the actual cost was as the landlord repainted the entire house before advertising for rent.

I have considered the photographs produced by the landlord and award amounts which I consider would address these issues.

The landlord withdrew his claims in respect of the kitchen kickboard and replacement of the light bulbs.

Because [The landlord/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5439562 — net $963.75 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning	$250.00	Cleaning
Garage remote	$110.75	Garage remote
Repairs: Bathroom door	$230.00	Repairs: Bathroom door
Repairs: Wall damage	$345.00	Repairs: Wall damage
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$963.75
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$963.75

Order

[The tenant/s] must pay [The landlord/s] $963.75 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing held on 1 July 2026 by video.
The tenancy began on 4 July 2020 and ended on 8 February 2026.
The landlord had provided an unsigned tenancy agreement with his application. During the hearing he provided a signed agreement which named a further four tenants. In 2024 there was a change to the tenants where four tenants remained. The tenant advised that at the end of the tenancy there were three tenants.
I note that the Bond Centre had the names of all the tenants. The application was only served on one tenant, but I am satisfied that he represents all the tenants remaining at the end of the tenancy because he has been in contact with them recently as the bond was released to the tenants in March 2026.
The landlord has applied for compensation following the end of the tenancy.

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 tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy. I refer to the photographs produced by the landlord. I consider that further cleaning was required in respect of the oven, a toilet and a door. I have reduced the landlord claim and award $250.00.
The tenant acknowledged that one garage door remote was not returned at the end of the tenancy. The landlord produced a quote with two amounts, one for supplying the remote which would need to be coded (instructions would be provided) and the other where the contractor attends to supply and code the remote. I don’t think it is too difficult for the landlord to code the remote with the instructions provided. Therefore, I award the lesser amount of $110.75.

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.
The tenant acknowledged damage to one door and a wall which had been repaired but needed painting.
The landlord had produced a quote for the repair, but the invoice was not clear what the actual cost was as the landlord repainted the entire house before advertising for rent.
I have considered the photographs produced by the landlord and award amounts which I consider would address these issues.
The landlord withdrew his claims in respect of the kitchen kickboard and replacement of the light bulbs.
Because [The landlord/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5439562 — Property damage at 19 Farnol Street, Hillsborough, Auckland 1042

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5439562 — Property damage at 19 Farnol Street, Hillsborough, Auckland 1042

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 the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

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 the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions