What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5465249 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] tenant/s] must pay [The tenant/s] landlord/s] $3, 017.27 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

How much money was awarded in case 5465249?

Cleaning: $480.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $295.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $194.80 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $182.88 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $35.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $166.75 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,470.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Carpet BR 1 And BR 2: $1,670.34 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $494.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5465249?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5465249?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/14041133-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5465249 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] tenant/s] must pay [The tenant/s] landlord/s] $3, 017.27 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

How much money was awarded in case 5465249?

Cleaning: $480.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $295.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $194.80 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $182.88 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $35.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $166.75 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,470.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Carpet BR 1 And BR 2: $1,670.34 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $494.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5465249?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5465249?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/14041133-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

16 Simmons Road, Taumarunui, Taumarunui 3920 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5465249 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5465249 — net $3,017.27 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning including carpet cleaning	$480.00	Cleaning including carpet cleaning
Lock/key replacement	$194.80	Lock/key replacement
Lock/key replacement	$182.88	Lock/key replacement
Rubbish removal	$494.50	Rubbish removal
Repairs to net curtains	$35.00	Repairs to net curtains
Window repairs	$166.75	Window repairs
Replace carpet BR 1 and BR 2	$1,670.34	Replace carpet BR 1 and BR 2
Repairs to walls	$1,470.00	Repairs to walls
Bailiff eviction fee and filing fee mediated order	$295.00	Bailiff eviction fee and filing fee mediated order
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,017.27
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,017.27

Mr Berquist appeared for the landlord. There was no appearance by the tenant.

The tenancy ended 19 January 2026. On 10 March 2026, the landlord filed the following claim: i. Rent arrears, ii. Failure to leave the property reasonably clean ($480.00), iii. Damage to curtains ($35.00), iv. Damage to windows ($166.75 and $264.73), v. Damage to walls ($1,520.29), vi. Replace locks and keys ($194.80 and $182.88), vii. Rubbish removal ($494.50), viii. Replace carpet ($1,670.34), ix. Damage shower fitting ($248.58), x. Bailiffs’ eviction fee and filing fee breached mediated order ($267 .00 and $28.00), xi. Drafting fee ($100.00)

In brackets beside each claim is the compensation sought.

At the commencement of the hearing the landlord withdrew the claim for rent arrears.

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

The landlord has provided pre tenancy and end of tenancy inspection reports, both include photographs.

The tenant breached the terms of a mediated order for rent arrears, and the tenancy ended. The landlord states that the tenant refused to vacate the property, and a Court Bailiff was engaged to evict the tenant on 19 January 2026. The landlord seeks reimbursement of the eviction cost and the filing fee for the breached mediated order. I am satisfied that the tenant is liable for these costs, and I award the amounts claimed.

The landlord’s application also includes a claim for $100.00, being a lawyer’s cost for drafting documents in support of the mediated order. The Tribunal’s jurisdiction to award costs is set out in section 102 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act). I am not satisfied that the Tribunal has jurisdiction to order reimbursement of this cost, and the claim is declined.

The property has two stories and consists of three bedrooms, kitchen, lounge / dining room, bathroom, separate toilet, laundry, garage, internal storage space, and a garden shed.

The property was built in the 1960s and was renovated in 2022.

Based on the end of tenancy inspection report it does not appear that any cleaning was completed. In the circumstances of the eviction this is not surprising. The amount claimed for cleaning includes carpet cleaning and removal of a small amount of rubbish by the cleaner.

The landlord provided a photograph of a set of net curtains that have been ripped. As the curtains were relatively new, they were able to be repaired.

The landlord is claiming for two broken windows. The landlord states that one was damaged during the tenancy, around 29 October 2025, and the other was discovered during the end-of-tenancy inspection. Both windows are in the kitchen.

The landlord stated that, during the tenancy, the tenant had arranged for the repair of a broken window in the kitchen, which they stated had been damaged by pot plants placed on the windowsill by the tenant. The landlord paid the glazier’s invoice and believed that the tenant had accepted responsibility and agreed to compensate the landlord. This did not occur.

The landlord has provided a photograph of the second window, which shows that it has been broken and a film sheet placed over it. The landlord stated that this had not been reported during the tenancy and no explanation was provided.

The landlord stated that at the end of the tenancy, the tenant did not return the keys, and that in order to secure the property, the locks had to be rekeyed. The landlord also stated that during the tenancy, the tenant had lost the keys to the front door and shed, which had to be replaced.

At the end of the tenancy the tenant removed their belongings from the house and placed them in the storage space. The landlord stated that shortly after the end of the tenancy, these belongings, which included furniture and appliances, were removed, and stored elsewhere. The tenant was then invited to retrieve their belongings from storage. The landlord stated that in February 2026, the tenant visited the storage facility with the landlord and removed items they wanted, leaving the rest to be disposed of by the landlord. The landlord has produced photographs of the items disposed of.

The landlord provided photographs of the carpet in bedrooms one and two, showing multiple stains on each. The landlord stated that the stains were caused by hair dye. There are also iron burn marks on the carpet. The landlord stated that attempts to remove the dye stains were unsuccessful. The burn makes cannot be removed. The landlord states that the carpet was new in 2022. The pre-tenancy inspection report does not record any pre-existing staining or damage.

The landlord states that they do not have insurance for damage caused by tenants. They state the damage was likely the result of carelessness. On that basis, the tenant’s liability is capped at four weeks’ rent per claim. The landlord has provided a quote to replace the carpet in both bedrooms for $2,949.75. Of this, they seek a contribution of $1,670.34, which they state takes into account betterment and depreciation.

The landlord has provided photographs showing damage to the walls, consisting of gouges, nicks, dents, scratches caused by the removal of adhesive hooks, and holes ranging in size from a 20-cent piece to the size of a fist or foot. The landlord states that although the individual instances of damage are relatively minor, the damage is widespread. The landlord is claiming $1,520.29 to repair the damage. The invoice also includes the replacement of three broken window latches. Law

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 account for all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(iv) of the Act.

The provision does not require the premises to be provided or returned in a spotless or immaculate condition.

The standard is based on what an average bystander would consider reasonable, not on the subjective opinions of the landlord and tenant. There is no scientific method to determine what is reasonably clean and tidy, and the Tribunal must evaluate the available evidence, including inspection reports and photographs.

Provided that the property was in a reasonably clean condition at the commencement of the tenancy, it should be returned in the same condition.

Subject to fair wear and tear, chattels should be returned in a reasonable condition.

To succeed with a claim for damage, the landlord must prove that damage occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. If this is established, the tenant must, to avoid liability, prove they did not carelessly or intentionally cause or permit the damage. See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B of the Act.

Fair wear and tear can be described as damage which might reasonably be expected to naturally occur over time, such as the deterioration or gradual wear occurring with everyday use. See Taylor v Webb [1937] 2KB 283 (CA).

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). See section 49B(3)(a) of the Act.

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. See section 49B (1) of the Act.

Damage is intentional where a person intends to cause damage and takes the necessary steps to achieve that purpose. Damage is also intentional when a person does something, or allows a situation to continue, knowing that damage is certain. See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.

In dealing with the issue of carelessness, the question is whether the tenant was exercising a degree of care and attention that a reasonable and prudent tenant would exercise in the circumstances.

Under section 40(1)(d) of the Act, the tenant must notify the landlord, as soon as possible after discovery, of any damage to the premises, or of the need for any repairs. A failure to do so may result in the tenant being liable for any subsequent damage.

The test is objective and not based on the subjective opinion of the tenant or landlord.

When awarding compensation for damage, the Tribunal must also consider betterment and depreciation. The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached their obligations and should not be better or worse off. In calculating betterment and depreciation, the Tribunal must consider the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy, as well as their estimated useful life. Analysis and decision Failure to leave the property reasonably clean.

Having considered the end-of-tenancy inspection report, I am satisfied that the tenant failed to leave the property reasonably clean and tidy, including the carpets. Damage to curtains

I am satisfied that the damage to the net curtains occurred during the tenancy. Based on the nature and location of the damage, I am also satisfied that the damage is more than fair wear and tear. Damage to windows

There is no evidence showing the window damaged and repaired during the tenancy. Nothing has been produced confirming that the tenant accepted liability. The claim for the window allegedly damaged during the tenancy is dismissed. Regarding the window discovered at the end of the tenancy, I am satisfied that this damage occurred during the tenancy and that it is more than fair wear and tear. Damage to walls

I am satisfied that the damage to walls shown in the end-of-tenancy inspection report occurred during the tenancy. The nature and amount of damage confirms that it is more than fair wear and tear.

There is a photograph of one of the three damaged latches. However, based on the evidence, I am not satisfied that the damage to the latch shown is more than fair wear and tear. The latch appears to be an original feature of the property. I award the amount claimed to repair the walls but deduct from the invoice the cost of the latch replacement. Replace locks and keys.

The keys to the property are chattels. The tenant must account for them during and at the end of the tenancy. Losing them during the tenancy or failing to return them at the end is a breach of the agreement. I am satisfied that the tenant is liable for the cost of changing or rekeying the locks. Rubbish removal.

I am satisfied that the tenant failed to remove all rubbish. The rubbish included beds, shelves, a fridge, a washing machine, a television, car tyres, a lawnmower, and other assorted household rubbish. The amount claimed to remove and dispose of the rubbish is reasonable. Replace carpet.

I am satisfied that the carpet in bedrooms one and two was damaged during the tenancy and that the damage is more than fair wear and tear. The nature of the damage suggests that it was likely the result of carelessness. The landlord does not have insurance. The rent was $500.00 a week. The tenant’s liability is therefore capped at $2,000.00 per room.

Carpet in residential tenanted properties has an expected useful lifespan of around 8–10 years. In this case, the carpet was in good condition at the commencement of the tenancy and, at the end, was approximately one-third of the way through its expected useful lifespan. I accept the landlord’s calculation and award the amount claimed. Damage shower fitting.

The landlord claims that the shower fitting was damaged. There is only one photograph of the fitting in the end-of-tenancy inspection report, but it is taken from a distance and has little evidential value. The invoice simply states that the shower head was replaced, with no explanation as to why. There is insufficient evidence, and the claim is dismissed. Costs

As the landlord has been substantially successful, I order reimbursement of the filing fee. Name suppression

Although the landlord has been substantially successful and is entitled to name suppression, they do not seek it, and no orders are made. See section 95A of the Act.

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5465249 — net $3,017.27 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning including carpet cleaning	$480.00	Cleaning including carpet cleaning
Lock/key replacement	$194.80	Lock/key replacement
Lock/key replacement	$182.88	Lock/key replacement
Rubbish removal	$494.50	Rubbish removal
Repairs to net curtains	$35.00	Repairs to net curtains
Window repairs	$166.75	Window repairs
Replace carpet BR 1 and BR 2	$1,670.34	Replace carpet BR 1 and BR 2
Repairs to walls	$1,470.00	Repairs to walls
Bailiff eviction fee and filing fee mediated order	$295.00	Bailiff eviction fee and filing fee mediated order
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,017.27
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,017.27