What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5482652 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] must pay [The landlord/s] $2,600.00 from her bond

How much money was awarded in case 5482652?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5482652?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Property damage, Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5482652?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13873370-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5482652 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] must pay [The landlord/s] $2,600.00 from her bond

How much money was awarded in case 5482652?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5482652?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Property damage, Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5482652?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13873370-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

21 Tucker Lane, Clive, Clive 4102 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5482652 — Cleanliness

Order

[The tenant/s] must pay [The landlord/s] $2,600.00 from her bond which the landlord already holds.
This Order is not to be given effect before 31 July 2026.
If the tenant files a cross application before 31 July 2026 (which must refer to this application) then: a. the landlord must immediately lodge the bond with the Bond Centre; and b. this Order must not be given effect before the tenant’s application is determined.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing by teleconference.
The tenant filed an application (5470011) seeking compensation and exemplary damages.
The landlord applied for compensation following the end of the tenancy.
Those applications were scheduled for hearing on 21 May 2026.
In an Order dated 21 May 2026 the tenant’s application was dismissed because she did not attend the hearing. She says she requested an adjournment. A review of that file shows that a message was received from the tenant on 13 May asking for the hearing to be moved to a date after 3 June. More information was requested about the reasons for the request, which was not received, so the adjournment request was not referred to the Tribunal. The tenant did not file a rehearing request because the 5 working day period 1 had expired before she became aware.
The 21 May Order adjourned the landlord’s claim for compensation for the cost of carpet replacement on the basis that: “Within 7 days from the date of this Order the landlord must provide to the Tribunal and to the tenant by e-mail, any further evidence the landlord wants the Tribunal to consider, limited to the questions of: a. what insurance cover is held by the landlord; b. whether an insurance claim can be made for the carpet damage; c. what excess would be payable for a claim; and d. what carpet replacement is covered by the quote from Outbreak Flooring Limited, dated 1 April 2026.”
Nothing further has been filed by the landlord.
Today, the tenant says she intends to file a further application. Because her previous claims have not been considered, it would be fair that she be allowed to resubmit those previous claims as well as any additional ones.
It would not be fair to the landlord to further delay consideration of his claims, especially if no application is filed by the tenant.
Having heard the parties’ evidence, I will determine the landlord’s claims but delay implementation of the Order to allow the tenant’s claims to be filed and heard, so long as those claims are filed within 21 days.

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. 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. See section 49B(3)(b) RTA. 1 S.105(2) 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.
The landlord’s evidence is that he does not hold insurance but he is not able to provide a copy of the tenancy agreement showing that required information was given to the tenant 2 .
Photographs provided by the landlord from before and after the tenancy show that during the tenancy the carpet were soiled and damaged. An e-mail from Gardna Carpet Cleaning notes that, “We clean the carpet throughout this property 13 January 2026. The carpet was heavily stained and majority of stains did not respond to treatment and are beyond restoration.” The landlord is justified in his decision to replace the carpets.
The landlord has re tenanted the premises without having replaced the carpets and so has not yet suffered any loss. I accept his evidence that the carpets will be replaced once these proceedings are finished.
The landlord has provided a quote for the carpet replacement costs - $6,777.36. Despite the Tribunal’s specific request in the May Order, the landlord has not provided evidence about what that quote covers.
Both parties agree that the carpet in the premises was some older blue carpet in the bedrooms (the landlord says 5-6 years old) and newer carpet in the living area and hall (the landlord says 1-2 years old).
IRD depreciation tables give an expected useful life for carpet in residential tenancies of around 8 years. Assuming ½ of the carpet to be the older carpet and ½ to be the newer, the landlord’s loss would be calculated as follows: a. (older carpet) $6,800.00 x 50% x 2/8 = $850.00; plus b. (newer carpet) $6,800.00 x 50% x 6/8 = $2,550.00 = Total $3,400.00.
That loss is greater than 4 weeks’ rent (@ $650.00 per week) which is the tenant’s maximum liability under s.49B(3)(b). That is the amount of compensation awarded. 2 S.13A(2) RTA

Order

[The tenant/s] must pay [The landlord/s] $2,600.00 from her bond which the landlord already holds.
This Order is not to be given effect before 31 July 2026.
If the tenant files a cross application before 31 July 2026 (which must refer to this application) then: a. the landlord must immediately lodge the bond with the Bond Centre; and b. this Order must not be given effect before the tenant’s application is determined.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing by teleconference.
The tenant filed an application (5470011) seeking compensation and exemplary damages.
The landlord applied for compensation following the end of the tenancy.
Those applications were scheduled for hearing on 21 May 2026.
In an Order dated 21 May 2026 the tenant’s application was dismissed because she did not attend the hearing. She says she requested an adjournment. A review of that file shows that a message was received from the tenant on 13 May asking for the hearing to be moved to a date after 3 June. More information was requested about the reasons for the request, which was not received, so the adjournment request was not referred to the Tribunal. The tenant did not file a rehearing request because the 5 working day period 1 had expired before she became aware.
The 21 May Order adjourned the landlord’s claim for compensation for the cost of carpet replacement on the basis that: “Within 7 days from the date of this Order the landlord must provide to the Tribunal and to the tenant by e-mail, any further evidence the landlord wants the Tribunal to consider, limited to the questions of: a. what insurance cover is held by the landlord; b. whether an insurance claim can be made for the carpet damage; c. what excess would be payable for a claim; and d. what carpet replacement is covered by the quote from Outbreak Flooring Limited, dated 1 April 2026.”
Nothing further has been filed by the landlord.
Today, the tenant says she intends to file a further application. Because her previous claims have not been considered, it would be fair that she be allowed to resubmit those previous claims as well as any additional ones.
It would not be fair to the landlord to further delay consideration of his claims, especially if no application is filed by the tenant.
Having heard the parties’ evidence, I will determine the landlord’s claims but delay implementation of the Order to allow the tenant’s claims to be filed and heard, so long as those claims are filed within 21 days.

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. 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. See section 49B(3)(b) RTA. 1 S.105(2) 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.
The landlord’s evidence is that he does not hold insurance but he is not able to provide a copy of the tenancy agreement showing that required information was given to the tenant 2 .
Photographs provided by the landlord from before and after the tenancy show that during the tenancy the carpet were soiled and damaged. An e-mail from Gardna Carpet Cleaning notes that, “We clean the carpet throughout this property 13 January 2026. The carpet was heavily stained and majority of stains did not respond to treatment and are beyond restoration.” The landlord is justified in his decision to replace the carpets.
The landlord has re tenanted the premises without having replaced the carpets and so has not yet suffered any loss. I accept his evidence that the carpets will be replaced once these proceedings are finished.
The landlord has provided a quote for the carpet replacement costs - $6,777.36. Despite the Tribunal’s specific request in the May Order, the landlord has not provided evidence about what that quote covers.
Both parties agree that the carpet in the premises was some older blue carpet in the bedrooms (the landlord says 5-6 years old) and newer carpet in the living area and hall (the landlord says 1-2 years old).
IRD depreciation tables give an expected useful life for carpet in residential tenancies of around 8 years. Assuming ½ of the carpet to be the older carpet and ½ to be the newer, the landlord’s loss would be calculated as follows: a. (older carpet) $6,800.00 x 50% x 2/8 = $850.00; plus b. (newer carpet) $6,800.00 x 50% x 6/8 = $2,550.00 = Total $3,400.00.
That loss is greater than 4 weeks’ rent (@ $650.00 per week) which is the tenant’s maximum liability under s.49B(3)(b). That is the amount of compensation awarded. 2 S.13A(2) RTA

Tenancy Tribunal case 5482652 — Cleanliness at 21 Tucker Lane, Clive, Clive 4102

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5482652 — Cleanliness at 21 Tucker Lane, Clive, Clive 4102

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions