What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5439748 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] to pay Baseden Property

How much money was awarded in case 5439748?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,194.29 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5439748?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5439748?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13634384-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5439748 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] to pay Baseden Property

How much money was awarded in case 5439748?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,194.29 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5439748?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5439748?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13634384-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

54 Cumberland Drive, Flagstaff, Hamilton 3210 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5439748 — Rent arrears

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5439748 — net $1,222.29 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 16 November 2025	$1,194.29	Rent arrears to 16 November 2025
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,222.29
Bond	$2,700.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,222.29

[The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] to pay Baseden Property Management Limited as the agent for Muriel Roake $1,222.29 from the bond, as calculated in the table below:

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,700.00 (number unknown) immediately apportioned as follows: Baseden Property Management Limited as the agent for Muriel Roake: $1,222.29 [The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s]: $1,477.71

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 16 November 2025. The landlord provided rent records that prove the amount owing of $1,194.29 at the end of the tenancy.

The tenants did not dispute this claim and the amount ordered is proved.

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

Background

In around September 2022, the tenants requested to install an inground vegetable garden on the basis that they would cover it up and lay grass seed for the next family.

This was approved by the owner: With regards to the vegetable patch, I am happy for them to undertake this at their own cost however it will need to be removed and reseeded when they leave as suggested.

When the tenancy ended, the tenants say they removed the garden and reseeded the area. However, on departure the grass seed had not yet grown in and as a result, the photographs provided show the area as a rectangle dirt area.

The owner was intending to place the property on the market quickly after the end of the tenancy and so proceeded to put ready lawn down to restore the lawn back to condition it was, prior to the tenants installing the vegetable garden.

The landlord now claims the cost associated with the installation of ready lawn of $665.16 (from two invoices of $500.25 and $164.91). They say that as there was no grass growing, the tenant had not complied with their obligations.

The tenants argue that they did what was required of them, and that the landlord is now seeking compensation for a better product than what was agreed. It is on this basis that they dispute the amount sought. Discussion

The tenants say that they reseeded the areas, and there is no clear evidence to show this was not done.

The landlord chose to lay ready lawn for immediate effect, but this exceeds the standards required by the agreement. There was nothing in the agreement that required the grass to be growing or have grown in, or for the lawn to be in the same state as it was prior to the vegetable garden installation – the agreement was simply for removal and reseeding.

The minor change provisions of the RTA do not override or replace a specific agreement between the parties about alterations and reinstatement, as exists here.

Accordingly, I consider that the tenants more likely than not met their obligations under the agreement and the landlord’s claim for the costs of the ready lawn is dismissed. Other matters

As Baseden Property Management Limited as the agent for Muriel Roake has succeeded with the claim in respect of rent arrears, I have reimbursed the filing fee. R Harvey-Lane 01 June 2026

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5439748 — net $1,222.29 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 16 November 2025	$1,194.29	Rent arrears to 16 November 2025
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,222.29
Bond	$2,700.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,222.29

Order

[The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] to pay Baseden Property Management Limited as the agent for Muriel Roake $1,222.29 from the bond, as calculated in the table below:
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,700.00 (number unknown) immediately apportioned as follows: Baseden Property Management Limited as the agent for Muriel Roake: $1,222.29 [The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s]: $1,477.71

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 16 November 2025. The landlord provided rent records that prove the amount owing of $1,194.29 at the end of the tenancy.
The tenants did not dispute this claim and the amount ordered is proved.

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

Background

In around September 2022, the tenants requested to install an inground vegetable garden on the basis that they would cover it up and lay grass seed for the next family.
This was approved by the owner: With regards to the vegetable patch, I am happy for them to undertake this at their own cost however it will need to be removed and reseeded when they leave as suggested.
When the tenancy ended, the tenants say they removed the garden and reseeded the area. However, on departure the grass seed had not yet grown in and as a result, the photographs provided show the area as a rectangle dirt area.
The owner was intending to place the property on the market quickly after the end of the tenancy and so proceeded to put ready lawn down to restore the lawn back to condition it was, prior to the tenants installing the vegetable garden.
The landlord now claims the cost associated with the installation of ready lawn of $665.16 (from two invoices of $500.25 and $164.91). They say that as there was no grass growing, the tenant had not complied with their obligations.
The tenants argue that they did what was required of them, and that the landlord is now seeking compensation for a better product than what was agreed. It is on this basis that they dispute the amount sought. Discussion
The tenants say that they reseeded the areas, and there is no clear evidence to show this was not done.
The landlord chose to lay ready lawn for immediate effect, but this exceeds the standards required by the agreement. There was nothing in the agreement that required the grass to be growing or have grown in, or for the lawn to be in the same state as it was prior to the vegetable garden installation – the agreement was simply for removal and reseeding.
The minor change provisions of the RTA do not override or replace a specific agreement between the parties about alterations and reinstatement, as exists here.
Accordingly, I consider that the tenants more likely than not met their obligations under the agreement and the landlord’s claim for the costs of the ready lawn is dismissed. Other matters
As Baseden Property Management Limited as the agent for Muriel Roake has succeeded with the claim in respect of rent arrears, I have reimbursed the filing fee. R Harvey-Lane 01 June 2026

Tenancy Tribunal case 5439748 — Rent arrears at 54 Cumberland Drive, Flagstaff, Hamilton 3210

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5439748 — Rent arrears at 54 Cumberland Drive, Flagstaff, Hamilton 3210

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions