What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5477913 about?

The tribunal order states: Chivonne Margaret Guthrie must pay Matthew Kristofski $1,226.72 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 5477913?

Cleaning: $390.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $328.97 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $99.26 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,053.54 awarded to landlord; Ranchslider (Drilled Holes: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $986.91 awarded to landlord; Utilities (Electricity/Internet Bund…: $440.04 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5477913?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness, Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5477913?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13635203-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5477913 about?

The tribunal order states: Chivonne Margaret Guthrie must pay Matthew Kristofski $1,226.72 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 5477913?

Cleaning: $390.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $328.97 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $99.26 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,053.54 awarded to landlord; Ranchslider (Drilled Holes: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $986.91 awarded to landlord; Utilities (Electricity/Internet Bund…: $440.04 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5477913?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness, Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5477913?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13635203-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

95 Robinson Road, Lower Moutere, RD 2, Lower Moutere Tenancy Tribunal Case 5477913 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5477913 — net $1,226.72 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$1,053.54	Rent arrears
Cleaning	$328.97	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$986.91	Rubbish removal
Carpet Cleaning	$390.00	Carpet Cleaning
Utilities (electricity/internet bundle	$440.04	Utilities (electricity/internet bundle
Repairs: Ranchslider (drilled holes	$200.00	Repairs: Ranchslider (drilled holes
Lock/key replacement	$99.26	Lock/key replacement
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,226.72
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,226.72

Order

Chivonne Margaret Guthrie must pay Matthew Kristofski $1,226.72 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,300.00 (BN-25077085) to Matthew Kristofski immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. He had a support person present with him. There was no appearance by the tenant.
The tenant sent an email just before the hearing saying, “I am very unwell this morning I don’t think it’s a good idea to come crook as. May this be rescheduled please thank you”. There were no proven grounds for any adjournment, and I declined any adjournment. The Registry replied by email to her advising she would be called at the commencement of the hearing and that she could participate remotely. The subsequent call made went to voicemail.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
A party who brings a claim to the Tenancy Tribunal must prove on the balance of probabilities (more likely than not) that their version of events took place. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden of proof.
The issue of evidence at Tenancy Tribunal hearings was considered by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02. Judge Mather stated: “...[the applicant] needs to be reminded that like anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or a 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.”
While I may not have referred to all the evidence presented at the hearing, the parties can be assured that it has all been considered.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 29 April 2026. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy was $1,053.54. The landlord sought further rent for five vacant days after possession returned due to the efforts required to return the premises to a reasonable condition. I decline the additional rent claim as a landlord should expect some “downtime” between tenancies. This position is further reinforced as the premises has not been relet as the landlord contemplates moving in. No rent loss has occurred.

How much is owed for utilities?

The landlord provided two invoices for a bundle electricity and internet supply. The account remained in the landlord’s name, and he on-charged the tenants, less an internet provider cost that was not a tenant benefit or cost. The first invoice was paid by the tenant. The two subsequent invoices prove the amount owing for utilities at the end of the tenancy was $440.04. I am satisfied the invoices are for the exclusive use of the tenant and the claim is awarded in full.

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 tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. The landlord provided entry and exit photos that establish tenant liability at exit. The landlord kept costs down by doing the cleaning and rubbish removal himself, with support. An invoice for rubbish disposal of $380.88 was justified on the evidence of volume left.
The landlord also undertook the removal of a number of abandoned items to the tenant’s preferred storage facility. That involved labour (accounted for in the total labour hours claimed) and vehicle costs of $80.00. This was a further low- cost remedy for the benefit of the tenant.
The total labour, disposal, and vehicle costs awarded are $986.91 for rubbish removal and $328 for cleaning. This is based on 28.5 hours at $30.00 1 ($855.00), $380.88 disposal and $80.00 vehicle. Having considered the evidence and submissions I applied a 75/25 apportionment of the total across the two claims. The landlord effort of 28.5 hours is justified by the evidence.
The carpet required a commercial clean at a cost of $390.00 – this action removed some stains but also a lingering odour of cat urine. This is awarded in full.
The tenant did not return all keys. Two were provided at the start of the tenancy but only one was returned. While the tenant may have considered it lost, the unaccounted-for location of, or any current possession of the key, justifies the landlord changing the locks. This was done at a cost of $99.26 and that amount is awarded.
The amounts ordered are proved. 1 The landlord had proposed an hourly rate of $50.00 but the Tribunal typically views an appropriate hourly rate for such labour claims to be nearer the minimum hourly rate. I have adopted $30.00 as fair.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

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. See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA.
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) RTA.
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). See section 49B(3)(b) RTA. Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. See section 49B(3A)(a) RTA.
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) RTA.
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 downstair ranch slider was damaged by the tenant’s partner screwing multiple plyboard sheets into the aluminium door frame to cover it as he had installed a basketball backboard above it. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord provided photos of the damage as well as a quote for a new ranch slider. That quote was over $6,000.00 and the landlord sought the $1,500 excess that would apply if a successful insurance claim was processed. He stated he had been advised by the supplier that spot repairs were not an option given the approximate 40 years age of the ranch slider.
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 depreciation, I have taken into account the age and condition of the ranch slider at the start of the tenancy and its likely useful lifespan.
An external ranch slider is considered an integral part of a building's structure and as such the building depreciation rate of 0% applies. The age and condition of the existing door must be factored into any compensation award. There has been no loss to date as no replacement has been made, nor has an insurance claim. Even at the lower $1,500 excess, I would consider that loss above any liable sum after consideration of betterment. Having considered the extent of screw hole damage, as well as the age and condition of the ranch slider, I award $200.00 to the landlord as tenant contribution to any future costs incurred in repair or replacement. Other claims
The landlord sought $150.00 after he cancelled a scheduled methamphetamine test. This was scheduled for after the tenancy ended (30 April 2026) and there was no impediment to the testing by the tenant. The landlord explained his reasons for the cancellation, but I do not consider the tenant is liable for the decision. This claim is dismissed.
The premises sits within a larger area that remains withy the landlord. During the tenancy, the tenant’s partner sold two vehicles from the landlord’s neighbouring area to a car wreaker. The landlord has evidence of the sale and I was told it is a matter with the police. The actions of the partner in arranging this on the neighbouring area, away from the premises is not considered a tenant liability. It is a matter best resolved through the police. The claim is dismissed. Filing fee
Because Matthew Kristofski has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5477913 — net $1,226.72 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$1,053.54	Rent arrears
Cleaning	$328.97	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$986.91	Rubbish removal
Carpet Cleaning	$390.00	Carpet Cleaning
Utilities (electricity/internet bundle	$440.04	Utilities (electricity/internet bundle
Repairs: Ranchslider (drilled holes	$200.00	Repairs: Ranchslider (drilled holes
Lock/key replacement	$99.26	Lock/key replacement
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,226.72
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,226.72

Order

Chivonne Margaret Guthrie must pay Matthew Kristofski $1,226.72 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,300.00 (BN-25077085) to Matthew Kristofski immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. He had a support person present with him. There was no appearance by the tenant.
The tenant sent an email just before the hearing saying, “I am very unwell this morning I don’t think it’s a good idea to come crook as. May this be rescheduled please thank you”. There were no proven grounds for any adjournment, and I declined any adjournment. The Registry replied by email to her advising she would be called at the commencement of the hearing and that she could participate remotely. The subsequent call made went to voicemail.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
A party who brings a claim to the Tenancy Tribunal must prove on the balance of probabilities (more likely than not) that their version of events took place. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden of proof.
The issue of evidence at Tenancy Tribunal hearings was considered by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02. Judge Mather stated: “...[the applicant] needs to be reminded that like anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or a 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.”
While I may not have referred to all the evidence presented at the hearing, the parties can be assured that it has all been considered.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 29 April 2026. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy was $1,053.54. The landlord sought further rent for five vacant days after possession returned due to the efforts required to return the premises to a reasonable condition. I decline the additional rent claim as a landlord should expect some “downtime” between tenancies. This position is further reinforced as the premises has not been relet as the landlord contemplates moving in. No rent loss has occurred.

How much is owed for utilities?

The landlord provided two invoices for a bundle electricity and internet supply. The account remained in the landlord’s name, and he on-charged the tenants, less an internet provider cost that was not a tenant benefit or cost. The first invoice was paid by the tenant. The two subsequent invoices prove the amount owing for utilities at the end of the tenancy was $440.04. I am satisfied the invoices are for the exclusive use of the tenant and the claim is awarded in full.

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 tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. The landlord provided entry and exit photos that establish tenant liability at exit. The landlord kept costs down by doing the cleaning and rubbish removal himself, with support. An invoice for rubbish disposal of $380.88 was justified on the evidence of volume left.
The landlord also undertook the removal of a number of abandoned items to the tenant’s preferred storage facility. That involved labour (accounted for in the total labour hours claimed) and vehicle costs of $80.00. This was a further low- cost remedy for the benefit of the tenant.
The total labour, disposal, and vehicle costs awarded are $986.91 for rubbish removal and $328 for cleaning. This is based on 28.5 hours at $30.00 1 ($855.00), $380.88 disposal and $80.00 vehicle. Having considered the evidence and submissions I applied a 75/25 apportionment of the total across the two claims. The landlord effort of 28.5 hours is justified by the evidence.
The carpet required a commercial clean at a cost of $390.00 – this action removed some stains but also a lingering odour of cat urine. This is awarded in full.
The tenant did not return all keys. Two were provided at the start of the tenancy but only one was returned. While the tenant may have considered it lost, the unaccounted-for location of, or any current possession of the key, justifies the landlord changing the locks. This was done at a cost of $99.26 and that amount is awarded.
The amounts ordered are proved. 1 The landlord had proposed an hourly rate of $50.00 but the Tribunal typically views an appropriate hourly rate for such labour claims to be nearer the minimum hourly rate. I have adopted $30.00 as fair.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

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. See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA.
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) RTA.
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). See section 49B(3)(b) RTA. Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. See section 49B(3A)(a) RTA.
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) RTA.
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 downstair ranch slider was damaged by the tenant’s partner screwing multiple plyboard sheets into the aluminium door frame to cover it as he had installed a basketball backboard above it. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord provided photos of the damage as well as a quote for a new ranch slider. That quote was over $6,000.00 and the landlord sought the $1,500 excess that would apply if a successful insurance claim was processed. He stated he had been advised by the supplier that spot repairs were not an option given the approximate 40 years age of the ranch slider.
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 depreciation, I have taken into account the age and condition of the ranch slider at the start of the tenancy and its likely useful lifespan.
An external ranch slider is considered an integral part of a building's structure and as such the building depreciation rate of 0% applies. The age and condition of the existing door must be factored into any compensation award. There has been no loss to date as no replacement has been made, nor has an insurance claim. Even at the lower $1,500 excess, I would consider that loss above any liable sum after consideration of betterment. Having considered the extent of screw hole damage, as well as the age and condition of the ranch slider, I award $200.00 to the landlord as tenant contribution to any future costs incurred in repair or replacement. Other claims
The landlord sought $150.00 after he cancelled a scheduled methamphetamine test. This was scheduled for after the tenancy ended (30 April 2026) and there was no impediment to the testing by the tenant. The landlord explained his reasons for the cancellation, but I do not consider the tenant is liable for the decision. This claim is dismissed.
The premises sits within a larger area that remains withy the landlord. During the tenancy, the tenant’s partner sold two vehicles from the landlord’s neighbouring area to a car wreaker. The landlord has evidence of the sale and I was told it is a matter with the police. The actions of the partner in arranging this on the neighbouring area, away from the premises is not considered a tenant liability. It is a matter best resolved through the police. The claim is dismissed. Filing fee
Because Matthew Kristofski has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5477913 — Rent arrears at 95 Robinson Road, Lower Moutere, RD 2, Lower Moutere

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5477913 — Rent arrears at 95 Robinson Road, Lower Moutere, RD 2, Lower Moutere

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

How much is owed for utilities?

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

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

How much is owed for utilities?

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

Frequently asked questions