Tenantcheck Insights · Case study

Tenancy Tribunal case 5469580 — Cleanliness at 54D Hungerford Road, Houghton Bay, Wellington 6023

Decided 25 Mar 2026 · Published 25 Mar 2026 · Application 5469580

Cleanliness

View official order on MoJ →Explore similar cases

At a glance

Key facts from the published tribunal order.

Location

Wellington

Tribunal region

Adjudicator

J Greene

Dispute themes

Award balance

Gross awards, any bond applied per the order, and the remaining balance payable.

Gross award: $836.88
Total balance for Tenant to pay Landlord: $836.88

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5469580 — net $836.88 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Carpet cleaning	$275.00	Carpet cleaning
Cleaning	$340.39	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$193.49	Rubbish removal
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement

Order

[The tenant/s] tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] tenant/s] must pay SLPM Limited as agent for M Quillan $836.88 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Ms Woodhead attended as the tenant, but Ms Feldberg did not. I conducted the hearing by video. I am satisfied that proper notice of the hearing was provided to Ms Feldberg.
The landlord has applied for compensation, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The tenants’ application is a defence to the landlord’s application. It does not raise any specific claims.

Did the tenants 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 1 .
The tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The carpets had to be cleaned to remove stains.
The amounts ordered are proved by invoices and photos and by the evidence the landlord’s representative gave at the hearing. Only one half of the rubbish removal cost has been charged to the tenant.
The parties reached an agreement to end the fixed term tenancy early. The settlement included the payment of the bond to the landlord in full and an amount of money in addition.
Ms Woodhead said her family and her boss encouraged her to make the application to test whether the bond should have been applied to the end of tenancy costs.
In this case, the correspondence produced in evidence confirms the offer made by the tenants to the landlord to end the fixed term tenancy early, and the landlord’s acceptance of that offer.
The agreement did not address end of tenancy costs. Other communications between the parties establish that the tenants accepted liability for at least some of the landlord’s claims.
End of tenancy issues such as cleaning and rubbish removal are distinct from any agreements between the parties about ending the tenancy early. Even when the Tribunal reduces the term of a fixed term tenancy it usually awards the landlord compensation for the loss of the contract, often by refunding the bond. So, the agreement reached in this case was not unusual. Result
The tenants must pay the landlord $836.88 which includes reimbursement of the filing fee on the successful application. 1 See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) Name suppression
The landlord did not seek name suppression. The tenant sought name suppression but is not entitled to an order because their defence to the application was not successful 2 .

Topics & place

Topics are dispute themes across the order (not the same as claim-type money lines).

Cleanliness Wellington

Residential Tenancies Act sections

s40(1), s95A

Key findings

Dispute theme: cleaning

Property management

SLPM LIMITED as agent for M Quillan (applicant)

Frequently asked questions

Common questions about this Tenancy Tribunal case.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5469580 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] tenant/s] must pay SLPM Limited as

How much money was awarded in case 5469580?

Cleaning: $275.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $340.39 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $193.49 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5469580?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5469580?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13347640-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

For landlords & property managers

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.

Tenantcheck reports take minutes: a small step before a dispute ends up at tribunal.

Order a Tenantcheck →

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5469580 — net $836.88 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.

Claim

Landlord

Tenant

Reason

Carpet cleaning

$275.00

Carpet cleaning

Cleaning

$340.39

Cleaning

Rubbish removal

$193.49

Rubbish removal

Filing fee reimbursement

$28.00

Filing fee reimbursement

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Ms Woodhead attended as the tenant, but Ms Feldberg did not. I conducted the hearing by video. I am satisfied that proper notice of the hearing was provided to Ms Feldberg.

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

The tenants’ application is a defence to the landlord’s application. It does not raise any specific claims.

Did the tenants 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 1 .

The tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The carpets had to be cleaned to remove stains.

The amounts ordered are proved by invoices and photos and by the evidence the landlord’s representative gave at the hearing. Only one half of the rubbish removal cost has been charged to the tenant.

The parties reached an agreement to end the fixed term tenancy early. The settlement included the payment of the bond to the landlord in full and an amount of money in addition.

Ms Woodhead said her family and her boss encouraged her to make the application to test whether the bond should have been applied to the end of tenancy costs.

In this case, the correspondence produced in evidence confirms the offer made by the tenants to the landlord to end the fixed term tenancy early, and the landlord’s acceptance of that offer.

The agreement did not address end of tenancy costs. Other communications between the parties establish that the tenants accepted liability for at least some of the landlord’s claims.

End of tenancy issues such as cleaning and rubbish removal are distinct from any agreements between the parties about ending the tenancy early. Even when the Tribunal reduces the term of a fixed term tenancy it usually awards the landlord compensation for the loss of the contract, often by refunding the bond. So, the agreement reached in this case was not unusual. Result

The tenants must pay the landlord $836.88 which includes reimbursement of the filing fee on the successful application. 1 See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) Name suppression

The landlord did not seek name suppression. The tenant sought name suppression but is not entitled to an order because their defence to the application was not successful 2 .