What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5473942 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

How much money was awarded in case 5473942?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $320.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $214.29 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5473942?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5473942?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13423868-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5473942 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

How much money was awarded in case 5473942?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $320.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $214.29 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5473942?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5473942?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13423868-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5473942 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5473942 — net $562.29 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears (to 18 January 2026	$214.29	Rent arrears (to 18 January 2026
Lawns and Garden work: Garden tidy up	$320.00	Lawns and Garden work: Garden tidy up
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$562.29
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$562.29

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
Weiling Wu to pay [The landlord/s] $562.29 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $562.29 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately. The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,437.71 ([Bond number suppressed]) to Weiling Wu immediately.

Reasons

On 13 February 2026, the tenant filed an application seeking refund of the bond and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
On 23 March 2026, the landlord filed a cross application seeking rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The hearing proceeded by way of video conference. [Property Manager], Property Manager, appeared for the landlord supported by [Support Person]. The tenant appeared.
At the commencement of the hearing the Adjudicator confirmed that despite having the same last name the Adjudicator and Property Manager and unknown to each other and not related. Landlord’s claims

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 18 January 2026. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy totalled $214.29.
The tenant took no issue with the landlord’s claim for rent arrears and told the Tribunal and expected the money to be deducted from her bond.
The amount claimed is proved.

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 “Act”).
The landlord seeks $460.00 compensation after paying a contractor to weed and tidy the garden following the end of the tenancy.
The landlord told the Tribunal that at the commencement of the tenancy the lawns and gardens were provided in a weed free, clean and tidy condition, with the lawns mown and the edges trimmed. A detailed pre-tenancy inspection report with attached photographs was provided which proved the property was provided in the condition described.
The landlord said that at the end of the tenancy the gardens were not returned in the same condition they were provided. The garden beds were not reasonably clean and tidy the garden beds were full of weeds, the edges needed to be trimmed and the lawns mown. A detailed end of tenancy inspection report with photographs was provided.
The tenant disputed the lawns and gardens were not returned in a reasonably clean and tidy condition at the end of the tenancy saying: a. She moved into the property in June 2025 and moved out in January 2026. Over that period the garden grew. As an inexperienced gardener, who usually paid a contractor to complete garden maintenance, she was not shown which plants constituted weeds and should have been removed. b. She was not shown the boundaries for the property - which was not fully fenced, backed onto a river bank and had a shared driveway, and was unclear where her responsibilities for the garden ended. c. The tenant told the Tribunal that she was disappointed not to be given the opportunity to remedy the issue after the tenancy ended and challenged the cost claimed. The tenant provided a quote for a contractor for $150.00 to remove overgrowth of weeds from flowerbeds around house, line trim and remove and dump green waste. Analysis and decision
The Act does not require the garden to be returned in an immaculate condition – only a reasonably clean and tidy state. There is no scientific way to determine what is reasonably clean and tidy. What is required is for the Tribunal to evaluate the evidence available – particularly the photographs presented and consider whether the grounds would be reasonably clean and tidy.
The Tribunal was able to make a proper before and after comparison of the condition of the gardens at the beginning and end of the tenancy. Having reviewed the evidence the Tribunal finds the garden beds were left overgrown with weeds at the end of the tenancy and were not returned in a reasonably clean and tidy condition. This was also reinforced by the tenant’s own quote for garden maintenance which records there was an “overgrowth of weed[s]” in the flower beds.
Based on the photographs available, the size of the section, the description of the work done and with reference to the tenant’s quote, I award the landlord $320.00 compensation for garden maintenance costs. That gives the landlord four hours of gardening at the rate of $80.00 per hour. I consider this to be sufficient time to undertake the necessary work and remove and dump the weeds based on the photographs provided.
The Tribunal notes the tenant’s complaint that she was not given the opportunity to tidy the garden after the tenancy ended. There was no statutory obligation requiring the landlords to allow tenants back onto the premises after a tenancy ends to remedy any identified defects with the property. Tenant’s claims
The tenant seeks refund of the bond.
The landlord has been successful in their claim on the bond and $562.29 will be deducted from the bond to compensate the landlord for the costs incurred following the end of the tenancy.
The remainder of the bond will be refunded to the tenant. Other matters
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
The tenant has not been wholly or substantially successful with their claim and costs are not awarded.
The landlord has applied for name suppression. Section 95A(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provided that the Tribunal must, on application of a party that has been wholly or substantially successful in proceedings, order that party’s name and identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
The landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim and is therefore granted name suppression.
The tenant did not seek name suppression.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5473942 — net $562.29 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears (to 18 January 2026	$214.29	Rent arrears (to 18 January 2026
Lawns and Garden work: Garden tidy up	$320.00	Lawns and Garden work: Garden tidy up
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$562.29
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$562.29

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
Weiling Wu to pay [The landlord/s] $562.29 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $562.29 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately. The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,437.71 ([Bond number suppressed]) to Weiling Wu immediately.

Reasons

On 13 February 2026, the tenant filed an application seeking refund of the bond and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
On 23 March 2026, the landlord filed a cross application seeking rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The hearing proceeded by way of video conference. [Property Manager], Property Manager, appeared for the landlord supported by [Support Person]. The tenant appeared.
At the commencement of the hearing the Adjudicator confirmed that despite having the same last name the Adjudicator and Property Manager and unknown to each other and not related. Landlord’s claims

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 18 January 2026. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy totalled $214.29.
The tenant took no issue with the landlord’s claim for rent arrears and told the Tribunal and expected the money to be deducted from her bond.
The amount claimed is proved.

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 “Act”).
The landlord seeks $460.00 compensation after paying a contractor to weed and tidy the garden following the end of the tenancy.
The landlord told the Tribunal that at the commencement of the tenancy the lawns and gardens were provided in a weed free, clean and tidy condition, with the lawns mown and the edges trimmed. A detailed pre-tenancy inspection report with attached photographs was provided which proved the property was provided in the condition described.
The landlord said that at the end of the tenancy the gardens were not returned in the same condition they were provided. The garden beds were not reasonably clean and tidy the garden beds were full of weeds, the edges needed to be trimmed and the lawns mown. A detailed end of tenancy inspection report with photographs was provided.
The tenant disputed the lawns and gardens were not returned in a reasonably clean and tidy condition at the end of the tenancy saying: a. She moved into the property in June 2025 and moved out in January 2026. Over that period the garden grew. As an inexperienced gardener, who usually paid a contractor to complete garden maintenance, she was not shown which plants constituted weeds and should have been removed. b. She was not shown the boundaries for the property - which was not fully fenced, backed onto a river bank and had a shared driveway, and was unclear where her responsibilities for the garden ended. c. The tenant told the Tribunal that she was disappointed not to be given the opportunity to remedy the issue after the tenancy ended and challenged the cost claimed. The tenant provided a quote for a contractor for $150.00 to remove overgrowth of weeds from flowerbeds around house, line trim and remove and dump green waste. Analysis and decision
The Act does not require the garden to be returned in an immaculate condition – only a reasonably clean and tidy state. There is no scientific way to determine what is reasonably clean and tidy. What is required is for the Tribunal to evaluate the evidence available – particularly the photographs presented and consider whether the grounds would be reasonably clean and tidy.
The Tribunal was able to make a proper before and after comparison of the condition of the gardens at the beginning and end of the tenancy. Having reviewed the evidence the Tribunal finds the garden beds were left overgrown with weeds at the end of the tenancy and were not returned in a reasonably clean and tidy condition. This was also reinforced by the tenant’s own quote for garden maintenance which records there was an “overgrowth of weed[s]” in the flower beds.
Based on the photographs available, the size of the section, the description of the work done and with reference to the tenant’s quote, I award the landlord $320.00 compensation for garden maintenance costs. That gives the landlord four hours of gardening at the rate of $80.00 per hour. I consider this to be sufficient time to undertake the necessary work and remove and dump the weeds based on the photographs provided.
The Tribunal notes the tenant’s complaint that she was not given the opportunity to tidy the garden after the tenancy ended. There was no statutory obligation requiring the landlords to allow tenants back onto the premises after a tenancy ends to remedy any identified defects with the property. Tenant’s claims
The tenant seeks refund of the bond.
The landlord has been successful in their claim on the bond and $562.29 will be deducted from the bond to compensate the landlord for the costs incurred following the end of the tenancy.
The remainder of the bond will be refunded to the tenant. Other matters
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
The tenant has not been wholly or substantially successful with their claim and costs are not awarded.
The landlord has applied for name suppression. Section 95A(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provided that the Tribunal must, on application of a party that has been wholly or substantially successful in proceedings, order that party’s name and identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
The landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim and is therefore granted name suppression.
The tenant did not seek name suppression.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5473942 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5473942 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

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

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

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

Frequently asked questions