How much money was awarded in case 5483171?

Call-Out Fees: $1,207.50 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,492.54 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5483171?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5483171?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13611741-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5483171?

Call-Out Fees: $1,207.50 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,492.54 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5483171?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5483171?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13611741-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5483171 — Property damage

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5483171 about?

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

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5483171 — net $748.04 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Door repairs	$1,492.54	Door repairs
Call-out fees	$1,207.50	Call-out fees
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$748.04
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$748.04

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord name and identifying details.

The tenancy of Hardi Elijah Leti Pomate at [Tenancy address suppressed] is terminated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at 5.0pm on Thursday 28 May 2026.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,980.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Hardi Elijah Leti Pomate must pay [The landlord/s] $748.04 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not appear.

The absence of a party does not prevent the matter from being heard and determined.

The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the tenant’s obligations, and compensation for damage and call-out fees.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

The Tribunal may terminate a tenancy for breach where, due to the nature or extent of the breach, it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate. See section 56(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Where the breach is capable of remedy the landlord must first serve a notice on the tenant requiring them to remedy the breach within at least 14 days and establish that the tenant has failed to do so.

The tenant has breached their obligations by damaging two doors at the complex on two separate occasions, and by having 14 call-outs by security to allow access.

The landlord served a 14-day notice on the tenant on 10 March, 19 March, and 26 March, and the tenant did not remedy the breach within the required period.

It would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy because of the extent and repeated nature of the damage, and risk of more call-outs fees.

I award $1,207.50 for the call-out fees in accordance with the invoices provided.

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.

The following damage was caused during the tenancy: broken door frames, and locks. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The amount ordered is proved.

Because the landlord has wholly succeeded with the claim, the tenant must reimburse the filing fee.

The landlord is entitled to name suppression as requested.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5483171 — net $748.04 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Door repairs	$1,492.54	Door repairs
Call-out fees	$1,207.50	Call-out fees
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$748.04
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$748.04

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord name and identifying details.
The tenancy of Hardi Elijah Leti Pomate at [Tenancy address suppressed] is terminated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at 5.0pm on Thursday 28 May 2026.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,980.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.
Hardi Elijah Leti Pomate must pay [The landlord/s] $748.04 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not appear.
The absence of a party does not prevent the matter from being heard and determined.
The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the tenant’s obligations, and compensation for damage and call-out fees.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

The Tribunal may terminate a tenancy for breach where, due to the nature or extent of the breach, it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate. See section 56(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Where the breach is capable of remedy the landlord must first serve a notice on the tenant requiring them to remedy the breach within at least 14 days and establish that the tenant has failed to do so.
The tenant has breached their obligations by damaging two doors at the complex on two separate occasions, and by having 14 call-outs by security to allow access.
The landlord served a 14-day notice on the tenant on 10 March, 19 March, and 26 March, and the tenant did not remedy the breach within the required period.
It would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy because of the extent and repeated nature of the damage, and risk of more call-outs fees.
I award $1,207.50 for the call-out fees in accordance with the invoices provided.

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.
The following damage was caused during the tenancy: broken door frames, and locks. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amount ordered is proved.
Because the landlord has wholly succeeded with the claim, the tenant must reimburse the filing fee.
The landlord is entitled to name suppression as requested.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5483171 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5483171 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

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

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions