What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5441370 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 5441370?

Carpet Stain Removal: $207.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Lease Break Fee: $399.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $3,922.86 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $398.40 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5441370?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5441370?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13784864-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5441370 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 5441370?

Carpet Stain Removal: $207.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Lease Break Fee: $399.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $3,922.86 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $398.40 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5441370?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5441370?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13784864-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

32 Morere Street, Titahi Bay, Porirua 5022 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5441370 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5441370 — net $2,475.26 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears up to and including 17 March 2026	$3,922.86	Rent arrears up to and including 17 March 2026
Lease break fee	$399.00	Lease break fee
Rubbish removal	$398.40	Rubbish removal
Carpet stain removal	$207.00	Carpet stain removal
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,475.26
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,475.26

Order

[The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] must pay Wolfbrook Property Management Limited As Agent For Thitinuch Chongko And [The landlord/s] $2,475.26 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,480.00 to Wolfbrook Property Management Limited As Agent For Thitinuch Chongko And [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

This is a reserved decision. The hearing was conducted by video conference 5441370 2 on 22 June 2026. A representative of the landlord’s agent attended the hearing for the landlord. An attempt was made to contact the tenant by telephone, but it was unsuccessful. The tenant has not communicated with the Tribunal as to why they would not attend the hearing. The hearing proceeded in the tenant’s absence.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Relevant legal considerations:
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations. That means that it is for the party bringing the application to establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. The party bringing the claim must establish that what they are claiming is more likely than not. This is referred to as the “burden of proof”. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
As noted by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: … [L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.
I do not need to be completely certain, but I need to be more certain than uncertain. In deciding any particular claim, I must consider all the evidence presented (including oral evidence during the hearing). I must weigh this evidence to decide what is more likely.

How much is owed for rent and is the tenant liable for the lease break fee?

The tenancy was for a fixed term with an end date of 26 April 2026.
On 25 February 2026, the landlord’s agent sent an email to the tenant regarding rent arrears. The tenant replied saying they were waning to end the tenancy. An email exchange followed whereby the landlord agreed to end the tenancy early on 17 March 2026 provided the tenant paid the lease break fee of $399. and the tenant replied confirming they wished to end the tenancy early.
I find that the tenancy ended on 17 March 2026. The landlord has provided a rent summary which proves the rent arrears owing. This claim is proved. 5441370 3
There is an argument for the lease break fee to be reduced because the fee would have been incurred the following month if the tenant had remained until the end of the fixed term. However, I accept the landlord’s position that this was a condition of the tenant being released from the lease early.
The tenant’s agent has provided a breakdown showing the work that was incurred for the fee, including open homes, checks of prospective new tenants etc.
The landlord’s agent confirmed during the hearing that while the fee has not been paid by the landlord, if the Tribunal does not award the fee, the landlord will be charged.
The claim for the lease break fee of $399.00 (including GST) is also proved.

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

Section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) provides that 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. Section 40(1)(ca) of the RTA provides the tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The landlord has provided photographic evidence showing that the tenant left a considerable amount of rubbish at the premises. The landlord has also provided an invoice showing that it was charged $398.48 (including GST) for rubbish removal.
This claim is proved.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B of the RTA provides that 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.
Section 49B(3)(a) of the RTA provides that where the damage is caused carelessly, and is covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to the lesser of the insurance excess or four weeks' rent (or four weeks' market rent in the case of a tenant paying income-related rent).
Section 49B(3)(b) of the RTA provides that where the damage is careless and is not covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to four weeks' rent (or market rent). Section 49B(3A)(a) of the RTA provides that 5441370 4 where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage.
Section 49B(1) of the RTA provides that tenants are liable for the cost of repairing damage that is intentional or which results from any activity at the premises that is an imprisonable offence. This applies to anything the tenant does and anything done by a person they are responsible for.
Damage is intentional where a person intends to cause damage and takes the necessary steps to achieve that purpose. Damage is also intentional where a person does something, or allows a situation to continue, knowing that damage is a certainty. (See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.)
The landlord says the tenant left a stain on the carpet. The landlord has provided photographic evidence from the start and the end of the tenancy showing that the stain was caused during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. The tenant did not attend the hearing and has not disproved that the damage was not intentional or careless.
This claim is proved, and I award $207.00 (including GST). Filing fee:
The landlord has wholly succeeded with the claim. For this reason, I must order reimbursement of the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5441370 — net $2,475.26 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears up to and including 17 March 2026	$3,922.86	Rent arrears up to and including 17 March 2026
Lease break fee	$399.00	Lease break fee
Rubbish removal	$398.40	Rubbish removal
Carpet stain removal	$207.00	Carpet stain removal
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,475.26
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,475.26

Order

[The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] must pay Wolfbrook Property Management Limited As Agent For Thitinuch Chongko And [The landlord/s] $2,475.26 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,480.00 to Wolfbrook Property Management Limited As Agent For Thitinuch Chongko And [The landlord/s] immediately.

Reasons

This is a reserved decision. The hearing was conducted by video conference 5441370 2 on 22 June 2026. A representative of the landlord’s agent attended the hearing for the landlord. An attempt was made to contact the tenant by telephone, but it was unsuccessful. The tenant has not communicated with the Tribunal as to why they would not attend the hearing. The hearing proceeded in the tenant’s absence.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Relevant legal considerations:
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations. That means that it is for the party bringing the application to establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. The party bringing the claim must establish that what they are claiming is more likely than not. This is referred to as the “burden of proof”. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
As noted by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: … [L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.
I do not need to be completely certain, but I need to be more certain than uncertain. In deciding any particular claim, I must consider all the evidence presented (including oral evidence during the hearing). I must weigh this evidence to decide what is more likely.

How much is owed for rent and is the tenant liable for the lease break fee?

The tenancy was for a fixed term with an end date of 26 April 2026.
On 25 February 2026, the landlord’s agent sent an email to the tenant regarding rent arrears. The tenant replied saying they were waning to end the tenancy. An email exchange followed whereby the landlord agreed to end the tenancy early on 17 March 2026 provided the tenant paid the lease break fee of $399. and the tenant replied confirming they wished to end the tenancy early.
I find that the tenancy ended on 17 March 2026. The landlord has provided a rent summary which proves the rent arrears owing. This claim is proved. 5441370 3
There is an argument for the lease break fee to be reduced because the fee would have been incurred the following month if the tenant had remained until the end of the fixed term. However, I accept the landlord’s position that this was a condition of the tenant being released from the lease early.
The tenant’s agent has provided a breakdown showing the work that was incurred for the fee, including open homes, checks of prospective new tenants etc.
The landlord’s agent confirmed during the hearing that while the fee has not been paid by the landlord, if the Tribunal does not award the fee, the landlord will be charged.
The claim for the lease break fee of $399.00 (including GST) is also proved.

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

Section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) provides that 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. Section 40(1)(ca) of the RTA provides the tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The landlord has provided photographic evidence showing that the tenant left a considerable amount of rubbish at the premises. The landlord has also provided an invoice showing that it was charged $398.48 (including GST) for rubbish removal.
This claim is proved.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B of the RTA provides that 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.
Section 49B(3)(a) of the RTA provides that where the damage is caused carelessly, and is covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to the lesser of the insurance excess or four weeks' rent (or four weeks' market rent in the case of a tenant paying income-related rent).
Section 49B(3)(b) of the RTA provides that where the damage is careless and is not covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to four weeks' rent (or market rent). Section 49B(3A)(a) of the RTA provides that 5441370 4 where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage.
Section 49B(1) of the RTA provides that tenants are liable for the cost of repairing damage that is intentional or which results from any activity at the premises that is an imprisonable offence. This applies to anything the tenant does and anything done by a person they are responsible for.
Damage is intentional where a person intends to cause damage and takes the necessary steps to achieve that purpose. Damage is also intentional where a person does something, or allows a situation to continue, knowing that damage is a certainty. (See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.)
The landlord says the tenant left a stain on the carpet. The landlord has provided photographic evidence from the start and the end of the tenancy showing that the stain was caused during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. The tenant did not attend the hearing and has not disproved that the damage was not intentional or careless.
This claim is proved, and I award $207.00 (including GST). Filing fee:
The landlord has wholly succeeded with the claim. For this reason, I must order reimbursement of the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5441370 — Rent arrears at 32 Morere Street, Titahi Bay, Porirua 5022

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5441370 — Rent arrears at 32 Morere Street, Titahi Bay, Porirua 5022

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent and is the tenant liable for the lease break fee?

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent and is the tenant liable for the lease break fee?

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions