How much money was awarded in case 5486230?

Cleaning: $185.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; to walls, doors, carpet, and to a st…: $1,127.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5486230?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5486230?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13784521-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5486230?

Cleaning: $185.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; to walls, doors, carpet, and to a st…: $1,127.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5486230?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5486230?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13784521-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5486230 — Property damage

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5486230 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 5486230 — net $220.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Carpet Cleaning	$185.00	Carpet Cleaning
Repairs: to walls, doors, carpet, and to a step	$1,127.00	Repairs: to walls, doors, carpet, and to a step
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$220.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$220.00

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

Kiri Rakuraku must pay [The landlord/s] $220.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,120.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant was properly served but did not attend.

The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. The claim was clarified at the start of the hearing.

How much is owed for rent?

The fixed term tenancy ended by agreement on 23 April 2026. The landlords are claiming two weeks of missed rent at the end of the tenancy. This is their claim to prove.

The landlord said the tenant paid all the rent for the whole tenancy but missed the last four weeks of rent and that used up her two weeks in advance paid at the start of tenancy in 2024 that had never been used. I was provided with a spreadsheet that showed when payments were received. The spread sheet did not give me the rent periods, a running list of arrears, and it did not show the credit. The landlords also provided me with bank information.

It is the landlord’s job to provide me with a rent summary. It is not my job to use the hearing time to go through bank statements and create a rent summary. This situation was complicated by rent in advance not being used up at the start of the tenancy. I am not willing to rely on the landlord’s verbal evidence that the tenant was exactly two weeks in advance at the end of a two year tenancy. The claim of rent arrears is not proved and it is dismissed.

Did the tenant comply with her obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Tenants must return the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy state and remove their rubbish at the end of the tenancy. See section 40(1)(c) and (e)(iii) Residential Tenancies Act (RTA).

The RTA does not require the premises to be provided or returned in a spotless or an immaculate condition. The standard is based on what an average bystander would consider reasonable, not on the subjective opinions of the landlord and tenant. There is no scientific way to determine what is reasonably clean and tidy, and the Tribunal must evaluate the evidence available, and in particular inspection reports and photographs.

There is a claim for cleaning and carpet cleaning. The landlord provided a video and some photos taken at the final inspection. There is good evidence to support the claim for carpet cleaning. There is no evidence to show the rest of the apartment needed to be cleaned. I have calculated the carpet cleaning as $185, which is a reasonable amount for the cleaning and odour and stain treatments.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

There is a claim for the cost of repairs. The 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.

The landlord has proved there was damage to walls, to a door, to the carpet, and to a step during the tenancy. The tenant had dogs in the apartment which was not allowed. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The amounts ordered are proved.

The landlord has claimed one week of lost rent because the tenant left the apartment is such a poor condition. I accept the landlord could not advertise until after the repairs and odour treatments were done. But the amount of work only caused one week of delay, and it took another week to find a new tenant. I would expect prudent landlords to use the time at the end of a two year tenancy for maintenance and HHS checks anyway. I do not find the delay was unreasonable. This claim is dismissed.

Can the landlord recover the cost of the trade me advertising?

The landlord has claimed the cost of the trade me advertising without providing an itemised account. Section 44A RTA provides that the landlord must provide an itemised account to the tenant of any expenses incurred in respect to a termination under Section 50(1)(d) RTA before the cost can be awarded by the Tribunal. This claim is dismissed. Other orders

I have sent a request to the Bond Centre so the bond can be refunded to the landlord.

Because the landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

The landlord has made an application for suppression. Section 95A RTA provides that the Tribunal may, on the application of any party to proceedings or on its own initiative, order that the name of a party not be published, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest.

The landlord’s name is suppressed because they are the most successful party. The tenant’s name will be published because there is public interest when tenants owe money at the end of the tenancy.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5486230 — net $220.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Carpet Cleaning	$185.00	Carpet Cleaning
Repairs: to walls, doors, carpet, and to a step	$1,127.00	Repairs: to walls, doors, carpet, and to a step
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$220.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$220.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
Kiri Rakuraku must pay [The landlord/s] $220.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,120.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.
All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant was properly served but did not attend.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. The claim was clarified at the start of the hearing.

How much is owed for rent?

The fixed term tenancy ended by agreement on 23 April 2026. The landlords are claiming two weeks of missed rent at the end of the tenancy. This is their claim to prove.
The landlord said the tenant paid all the rent for the whole tenancy but missed the last four weeks of rent and that used up her two weeks in advance paid at the start of tenancy in 2024 that had never been used. I was provided with a spreadsheet that showed when payments were received. The spread sheet did not give me the rent periods, a running list of arrears, and it did not show the credit. The landlords also provided me with bank information.
It is the landlord’s job to provide me with a rent summary. It is not my job to use the hearing time to go through bank statements and create a rent summary. This situation was complicated by rent in advance not being used up at the start of the tenancy. I am not willing to rely on the landlord’s verbal evidence that the tenant was exactly two weeks in advance at the end of a two year tenancy. The claim of rent arrears is not proved and it is dismissed.

Did the tenant comply with her obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Tenants must return the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy state and remove their rubbish at the end of the tenancy. See section 40(1)(c) and (e)(iii) Residential Tenancies Act (RTA).
The RTA does not require the premises to be provided or returned in a spotless or an immaculate condition. The standard is based on what an average bystander would consider reasonable, not on the subjective opinions of the landlord and tenant. There is no scientific way to determine what is reasonably clean and tidy, and the Tribunal must evaluate the evidence available, and in particular inspection reports and photographs.
There is a claim for cleaning and carpet cleaning. The landlord provided a video and some photos taken at the final inspection. There is good evidence to support the claim for carpet cleaning. There is no evidence to show the rest of the apartment needed to be cleaned. I have calculated the carpet cleaning as $185, which is a reasonable amount for the cleaning and odour and stain treatments.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

There is a claim for the cost of repairs. The 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.
The landlord has proved there was damage to walls, to a door, to the carpet, and to a step during the tenancy. The tenant had dogs in the apartment which was not allowed. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The amounts ordered are proved.
The landlord has claimed one week of lost rent because the tenant left the apartment is such a poor condition. I accept the landlord could not advertise until after the repairs and odour treatments were done. But the amount of work only caused one week of delay, and it took another week to find a new tenant. I would expect prudent landlords to use the time at the end of a two year tenancy for maintenance and HHS checks anyway. I do not find the delay was unreasonable. This claim is dismissed.

Can the landlord recover the cost of the trade me advertising?

The landlord has claimed the cost of the trade me advertising without providing an itemised account. Section 44A RTA provides that the landlord must provide an itemised account to the tenant of any expenses incurred in respect to a termination under Section 50(1)(d) RTA before the cost can be awarded by the Tribunal. This claim is dismissed. Other orders
I have sent a request to the Bond Centre so the bond can be refunded to the landlord.
Because the landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.
The landlord has made an application for suppression. Section 95A RTA provides that the Tribunal may, on the application of any party to proceedings or on its own initiative, order that the name of a party not be published, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest.
The landlord’s name is suppressed because they are the most successful party. The tenant’s name will be published because there is public interest when tenants owe money at the end of the tenancy.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5486230 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5486230 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Did the tenant comply with her obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Can the landlord recover the cost of the trade me advertising?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Did the tenant comply with her obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Can the landlord recover the cost of the trade me advertising?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions