Published tribunal order
Tenancy Tribunal case 5494289 — Rent arrears
Decided 4 Jun 2026 · Published 4 Jun 2026 · Application 5494289
- Rent arrears
Party names are redacted in the official published order.
Order
- An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenants’ names and identifying details.
- North Island Community Services Limited as agent for Sandra Guan must pay [The tenant/s] $31.36 immediately, as calculated as shown in table below:
- The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,640.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The tenant/s] immediately.
- All other claims are dismissed.
Reasons
- Both parties attended the hearing.
- 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 tenants dispute all claims against them.
How much is owed for rent and water rates?
- The tenancy ended on 30 April 2026.
- Originally when the landlord filed the claim, there was a miscalculation in the rent arrears claimed of $1,462.85. This incurred primarily as the property initially been managed by the owner before the property manager took over.
- The landlord provided updated rent records which prove the amount owing of $70.00 through to the end of the tenancy.
- The amount ordered is proved.
- The records provided show that there was a water rates credit of $101.36, and this has accordingly been deducted from the amount owed.
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 (RTA).
- The landlord claims $420.00 for carpet cleaning, alleging it was necessary due to the presence of a pet and an associated smell in the carpet.
- The tenants strongly dispute this claim. They state that they arranged for professional carpet cleaning by a reputable company and referred to an invoice as evidence. They suggest that any smell was likely from the cleaning chemicals and the fact that the carpets were still drying.
- Proving the presence of a smell in the carpet is inherently difficult. To award this claim, I must be satisfied on the balance of probabilities that, despite the tenants’ cleaning, the property did not meet the required standard.
- Upon reviewing the evidence, I note that the outgoing inspection on 30 April 2026 did not record any concerns about smell or the condition of the carpets. The carpet cleaning invoice also contains no adverse comments.
- There is therefore insufficient contemporaneous evidence that the property was not left in a reasonably clean and tidy condition, or that further carpet cleaning was required.
- As a result, I find that the landlord has not proven the claim for carpet cleaning, and this claim is dismissed. Other matters
- I have not ordered reimbursement of the filing fee. Had the landlord calculated the rent correctly before filing the claim, it is likely this fee could have been avoided.
- The landlord did not seek name suppression. The tenant requested name suppression and, as they have been substantially successful, this is granted under section 95A of the RTA. R Harvey-Lane 04 June 2026