What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5487392 about?

The tribunal order states: The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,060.00 (BN-00131462) immediately

How much money was awarded in case 5487392?

Cleaning: $138.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $434.15 awarded to landlord; Walls: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $146.62 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5487392?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5487392?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13825281-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5487392 about?

The tribunal order states: The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,060.00 (BN-00131462) immediately

How much money was awarded in case 5487392?

Cleaning: $138.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $434.15 awarded to landlord; Walls: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $146.62 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5487392?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5487392?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13825281-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

11 Waenganui Road, Hobsonville, Auckland 0616 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5487392 — Cleanliness

Tenantcheck Insights

11 Waenganui Road, Hobsonville, Auckland 0616 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5487392 — Cleanliness | TenantCheck

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5487392. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Water rates to 11/12/2025	$146.62	3. The landlord seeks: a) $196.22 for water rates arrears; b) $276.00 for carpet steam cleaning; c) $480.00 for relocating carpet from the wardrobes to areas a…
Carpet Cleaning	$138.00	Carpet Cleaning
Repairs: Walls	$100.00	Repairs: Walls
Cleaning	$434.15	Cleaning

Claims and awards for application 5487392. Verify on MoJ.

Water rates to 11/12/2025

Amount: $146.62
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: 3. The landlord seeks: a) $196.22 for water rates arrears; b) $276.00 for carpet steam cleaning; c) $480.00 for relocating carpet from the wardrobes to areas a…

Carpet Cleaning

Amount: $138.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Carpet Cleaning

Repairs: Walls

Amount: $100.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Walls

Cleaning

Amount: $434.15
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Carpet Cleaning Cleanliness Property damage Water Rates

Order

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,060.00 (BN-00131462) immediately apportioned as follows:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
This tenancy commenced on 5 July 2024 and concluded on 5 January 2026.
The landlord seeks: a) $196.22 for water rates arrears; b) $276.00 for carpet steam cleaning; c) $480.00 for relocating carpet from the wardrobes to areas affected by staining; d) $575.00 for wall repairs; and e) $484.15 for general cleaning and oven cleaning.
The tenant seeks the return of the bond.

Is the tenant liable for the water rates arrears?

The landlord seeks $196.22 for water rates arrears to 5 January 2026, being the final day of the tenancy. The final water meter reading, however, was not taken until 15 January 2026.
The portion of the account relating to the period between 11 December 2025 and 15 January 2026 is $49.60.
When I asked the landlord how this amount had been calculated, she initially stated that a meter reading had been taken on the final day of the tenancy. She later clarified that the amount had instead been calculated on a pro rata basis, having regard to the billing period and the number of days during that period that the tenant occupied the premises.
Section 39(3) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that a tenant is responsible for all outgoings in respect of the premises that are exclusively attributable to the tenant's occupation of the premises.
Because an actual meter reading was not taken on the date the tenancy ended, the amount claimed is not exclusively attributable to the tenants occupation. It is based on an estimate and therefore cannot properly be passed on under s 39(3).
Accordingly, I award the landlord $146.62, being the amount owing to 11 December 2025. The balance of the claim, being $49.60, is dismissed.

Is the tenant liable for the carpet cleaning and carpet relocation costs?

The landlord seeks recovery of the cost of carpet cleaning. They say that, after the carpet was cleaned, they discovered bleaching. Photographs have been provided showing some discolouration to the carpet. However, it is not clear from those photographs that the discolouration is the result of bleaching. It could equally be the result of scrubbing or the application of cleaning products. On the evidence before me, it does not appear to be bleaching.
The tenant has also provided evidence of the condition of the carpet at the commencement of the tenancy, showing several areas of pre-existing staining and discolouration.
I consider it fair that the tenant bear 50% of the carpet cleaning cost, as there is evidence of additional staining beyond that present at the commencement of the tenancy. However, given the existing condition of the carpet, an equal apportionment is appropriate.
The landlord also seeks $480.00 for relocating carpet from the wardrobe areas to stained areas of the property.
The expected useful life of residential carpet is eight years, the landlords representative suggested the carpet is about 5 years old. It is to be expected that carpet will show signs of deterioration through ordinary residential use, and that deterioration is evident here. While the landlord may choose to incur the cost of relocating the carpet, the deterioration complained of constitutes fair wear and tear and the respondent is therefore not liable for that cost.

Is the tenant liable for the cleaning costs?

The landlord has provided evidence demonstrating that the property was left well short of the standard required by s 40(1)(e)(iii) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, which requires a tenant to leave the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy condition at the end of the tenancy.
The tenant says that she vacated the property in mid-December and requested a joint inspection. The landlord did not accommodate that request or provide an opportunity for the tenant to return after the final inspection to undertake any additional cleaning. The tenant also states that she engaged a professional cleaner to complete an exit clean.
While it is best practice for a joint inspection to occur, and I accept that the tenant sought one, it was the Christmas period and the landlord did not oblige. I accept the tenants frustration in that regard.
However, it remains the tenant's responsibility to ensure that the premises are left in the required condition before surrendering possession. Once the tenancy has ended, the landlord is under no obligation to permit the tenant to re-enter the property to undertake further cleaning.
If the tenant did engage professional cleaners, she is understandably aggrieved that further cleaning was required. Nevertheless, the evidence provided by the landlord demonstrates that the premises were not left in a reasonably clean and tidy state. The photographs show, among other things, faecal matter remaining in the toilets, multiple unwiped surfaces, and an oven requiring cleaning.
The tenant did provide photographs showing that some drains had not been cleaned at the commencement of the tenancy. However, the condition of the premises at the conclusion of the tenancy was substantially worse.
The cleaning costs claimed are reasonable. However, to reflect the pre-existing condition of some aspects of the property, I deduct $50.00 from the cleaning claim.

Is the tenant liable for the wall repairs?

The landlord has provided photographs showing multiple dents to the walls. Most of those marks are properly characterised as fair wear and tear. A property that has been occupied can reasonably be expected to exhibit signs of ordinary use, including minor dents to walls.
Although the extent of some of the damage is difficult to determine, even on close inspection of the entry inspection photographs it is apparent that some dents were already present at the commencement of the tenancy.
I accept, that some of the damage resulted from the tenants installation of a baby gate. The tenant was entitled to install the baby gate with the landlord's consent, the cost of reinstating the wall, including repairing dents and paint damage caused by that installation, is the tenants responsibility.
In the circumstances, I consider that a contribution of $100.00 towards the wall repair costs is appropriate. Filing fee:
Both parties have brought claims before the Tribunal and neither has been wholly successful. In those circumstances, each party should bear their own filing fee.

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5487392. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Water rates to 11/12/2025	$146.62	3. The landlord seeks: a) $196.22 for water rates arrears; b) $276.00 for carpet steam cleaning; c) $480.00 for relocating carpet from the wardrobes to areas a…
Carpet Cleaning	$138.00	Carpet Cleaning
Repairs: Walls	$100.00	Repairs: Walls
Cleaning	$434.15	Cleaning

Claims and awards for application 5487392. Verify on MoJ.

Water rates to 11/12/2025

Amount: $146.62
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: 3. The landlord seeks: a) $196.22 for water rates arrears; b) $276.00 for carpet steam cleaning; c) $480.00 for relocating carpet from the wardrobes to areas a…

Carpet Cleaning

Amount: $138.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Carpet Cleaning

Repairs: Walls

Amount: $100.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Walls

Cleaning

Amount: $434.15
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Cleaning

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Carpet Cleaning Cleanliness Property damage Water Rates

Order

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,060.00 (BN-00131462) immediately apportioned as follows:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
This tenancy commenced on 5 July 2024 and concluded on 5 January 2026.
The landlord seeks: a) $196.22 for water rates arrears; b) $276.00 for carpet steam cleaning; c) $480.00 for relocating carpet from the wardrobes to areas affected by staining; d) $575.00 for wall repairs; and e) $484.15 for general cleaning and oven cleaning.
The tenant seeks the return of the bond.

Is the tenant liable for the water rates arrears?

The landlord seeks $196.22 for water rates arrears to 5 January 2026, being the final day of the tenancy. The final water meter reading, however, was not taken until 15 January 2026.
The portion of the account relating to the period between 11 December 2025 and 15 January 2026 is $49.60.
When I asked the landlord how this amount had been calculated, she initially stated that a meter reading had been taken on the final day of the tenancy. She later clarified that the amount had instead been calculated on a pro rata basis, having regard to the billing period and the number of days during that period that the tenant occupied the premises.
Section 39(3) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that a tenant is responsible for all outgoings in respect of the premises that are exclusively attributable to the tenant's occupation of the premises.
Because an actual meter reading was not taken on the date the tenancy ended, the amount claimed is not exclusively attributable to the tenants occupation. It is based on an estimate and therefore cannot properly be passed on under s 39(3).
Accordingly, I award the landlord $146.62, being the amount owing to 11 December 2025. The balance of the claim, being $49.60, is dismissed.

Is the tenant liable for the carpet cleaning and carpet relocation costs?

The landlord seeks recovery of the cost of carpet cleaning. They say that, after the carpet was cleaned, they discovered bleaching. Photographs have been provided showing some discolouration to the carpet. However, it is not clear from those photographs that the discolouration is the result of bleaching. It could equally be the result of scrubbing or the application of cleaning products. On the evidence before me, it does not appear to be bleaching.
The tenant has also provided evidence of the condition of the carpet at the commencement of the tenancy, showing several areas of pre-existing staining and discolouration.
I consider it fair that the tenant bear 50% of the carpet cleaning cost, as there is evidence of additional staining beyond that present at the commencement of the tenancy. However, given the existing condition of the carpet, an equal apportionment is appropriate.
The landlord also seeks $480.00 for relocating carpet from the wardrobe areas to stained areas of the property.
The expected useful life of residential carpet is eight years, the landlords representative suggested the carpet is about 5 years old. It is to be expected that carpet will show signs of deterioration through ordinary residential use, and that deterioration is evident here. While the landlord may choose to incur the cost of relocating the carpet, the deterioration complained of constitutes fair wear and tear and the respondent is therefore not liable for that cost.

Is the tenant liable for the cleaning costs?

The landlord has provided evidence demonstrating that the property was left well short of the standard required by s 40(1)(e)(iii) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, which requires a tenant to leave the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy condition at the end of the tenancy.
The tenant says that she vacated the property in mid-December and requested a joint inspection. The landlord did not accommodate that request or provide an opportunity for the tenant to return after the final inspection to undertake any additional cleaning. The tenant also states that she engaged a professional cleaner to complete an exit clean.
While it is best practice for a joint inspection to occur, and I accept that the tenant sought one, it was the Christmas period and the landlord did not oblige. I accept the tenants frustration in that regard.
However, it remains the tenant's responsibility to ensure that the premises are left in the required condition before surrendering possession. Once the tenancy has ended, the landlord is under no obligation to permit the tenant to re-enter the property to undertake further cleaning.
If the tenant did engage professional cleaners, she is understandably aggrieved that further cleaning was required. Nevertheless, the evidence provided by the landlord demonstrates that the premises were not left in a reasonably clean and tidy state. The photographs show, among other things, faecal matter remaining in the toilets, multiple unwiped surfaces, and an oven requiring cleaning.
The tenant did provide photographs showing that some drains had not been cleaned at the commencement of the tenancy. However, the condition of the premises at the conclusion of the tenancy was substantially worse.
The cleaning costs claimed are reasonable. However, to reflect the pre-existing condition of some aspects of the property, I deduct $50.00 from the cleaning claim.

Is the tenant liable for the wall repairs?

The landlord has provided photographs showing multiple dents to the walls. Most of those marks are properly characterised as fair wear and tear. A property that has been occupied can reasonably be expected to exhibit signs of ordinary use, including minor dents to walls.
Although the extent of some of the damage is difficult to determine, even on close inspection of the entry inspection photographs it is apparent that some dents were already present at the commencement of the tenancy.
I accept, that some of the damage resulted from the tenants installation of a baby gate. The tenant was entitled to install the baby gate with the landlord's consent, the cost of reinstating the wall, including repairing dents and paint damage caused by that installation, is the tenants responsibility.
In the circumstances, I consider that a contribution of $100.00 towards the wall repair costs is appropriate. Filing fee:
Both parties have brought claims before the Tribunal and neither has been wholly successful. In those circumstances, each party should bear their own filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5487392 — Cleanliness at 11 Waenganui Road, Hobsonville, Auckland 0616

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5487392 — Cleanliness at 11 Waenganui Road, Hobsonville, Auckland 0616

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Is the tenant liable for the water rates arrears?

Is the tenant liable for the carpet cleaning and carpet relocation costs?

Is the tenant liable for the cleaning costs?

Is the tenant liable for the wall repairs?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Is the tenant liable for the water rates arrears?

Is the tenant liable for the carpet cleaning and carpet relocation costs?

Is the tenant liable for the cleaning costs?

Is the tenant liable for the wall repairs?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions