What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5494638 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 5494638?

Cleaning: $150.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $450.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $188.56 awarded to landlord; 4 weeks rent limit - see 49B(3)(b)(i…: $1,560.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $482.20 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5494638?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5494638?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13896194-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5494638 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 5494638?

Cleaning: $150.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $450.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $188.56 awarded to landlord; 4 weeks rent limit - see 49B(3)(b)(i…: $1,560.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $482.20 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5494638?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5494638?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13896194-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5494638 — Property damage

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5494638 — net $2,858.76 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rubbish removal	$482.20	Rubbish removal
Cleaning: Bathroom	$150.00	Cleaning: Bathroom
Cleaning: walls and drapes	$450.00	Cleaning: walls and drapes
Lock/key replacement	$188.56	Lock/key replacement
Repairs: 4 weeks rent limit - see 49B(3)(b)(ii) & 49B(4	$1,560.00	Repairs: 4 weeks rent limit - see 49B(3)(b)(ii) & 49B(4
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,858.76
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,858.76

Both parties attended the hearing.

This tenancy initially began in 2011/2012. In 2024 the tenant’s father became unwell and from around this time there were relatively prolonged periods when she did not dwell at the tenancy but was staying with her father and family. There was also some time spent living in Samoa.

In October 2025, some rent payments were missed, and the landlord became aware that the property was empty. The matter came before the tribunal and on 2 February 2026, the tenancy was terminated as of 12 February 2026.

While the property was tenanted the faucet by which the toilet cistern is plumbed into the water supply had been damaged or failed in some way. This had leaked and the water had spread into the bedroom and the kitchen. Bedroom carpets were significantly affected by mould, and mould had grown on skirting boards and walls, curtains, and windowsills. Water had soaked into the bottom of the kitchen door, the bathroom door and draws, and the kitchen cabinetry kick boards and had blown out the MDF substrate of each.

There were also a large amount of the tenants goods lift in the premises along with rubbish, food that was in the fridge and pantry which had gone off, and other items.

The landlord has replaced the kitchen and bathroom doors, kitchen toe kicks, bathroom doors, and carpet throughout. Extensive cleaning has been necessary.

The landlord may claim to his insurer, however, the policy excludes gradual damage.

The landlord has claimed $11,002.91. This is composed of: a. the removal and disposal of the multi-damaged carpet $542.60; b. the replacement of the carpet $2700; c. the removal and dumping of rubbish $482.20; d. the deep cleaning of walls and skirtings to remove mould $150; e. the replacement of water damaged doors, kick boards, cabinetry, and skirting $5769.55; f. the cleaning and rehanging of curtains $450; g. the replacement of the lock $188.56; and h. two weeks rent while the tenants belongings were still left at the property $720. Tenant’s liability for damage

S 40(1)(c) and s40(e) RTA require a tenant to keep premises reasonably tidy, and at the end of the tenancy to remove all their goods and leave the premises and reasonably clean and tidy condition.

S 49A and s49B set limits on the extent to which the tenant can be liable for damage to premises.

S49B(2) and (3) say: (2) To the extent provided in subsection (3), the tenant is liable to the landlord for destruction of, or damage to, the premises that is caused by a careless act or omission of the tenant or of a person for whose actions the tenant is responsible under section 41 or 66L, other than an act or omission described in subsection (1). (3) The tenant’s liability under subsection (2) is limited,— (a)if the property is insured against the destruction or damage, to the lesser of the applicable excess under the insurance and whichever of the following is applicable: ... (ii) in any other case, the rent under the tenancy agreement for a period of 4 weeks; or (b) otherwise, to whichever of the following is applicable: ... (ii) in any other case, the rent under the tenancy agreement for a period of 4 weeks.

S 49B(4)(a) says: [I]f any insurance moneys that would otherwise have been payable because of the destruction or damage are irrecoverable because of an act or omission of the tenant ... for the purposes of subsection (3) the property is treated as not insured against the destruction or damage (and therefore subsection (3)(b) sets out the limit of the tenant’s liability under subsection (2));

In this case the damage would be likely to have been detected earlier had the tenant being present at the tenancy. Moreover, the landlord’s insurer has declined to pay for the damage as the initial damage had gradually worsened over time and was excluded as gradual damage.

This means that the tenant is liable for the water damage, as it has come about due to an omission on her part. However, S 49(3)(b)(ii) limits her liability to 4 weeks rent. This limit captures the damage and disposal of the carpets at paragraph [8] a. and b. and the replacement of doors and joinery at paragraph [8] e. As such I award the landlord $1560. Cleaning, rubbish removal and locks

A tenant is responsible for returning the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy fashion and free from rubbish. The evidence satisfies me that the cleaning conducted by the landlord was necessary, as such I award the landlord the $600 for the cleaning conducted. I am also satisfied that the rubbish removal was necessary and award the landlord $482.24 for the disposal of the rubbish.

The keys had not been returned at the time that the tenancy was terminated, I am satisfied that the replacement of the locks was appropriate and award the landlord $188.56. Rent

The landlord has claimed two weeks rent for the period after termination when the tenant’s goods were being stored in the carport. As discussed during the hearing this claim is legally problematic as the tenancy had ended by order of the Tribunal, and rent cannot be levied without a lease. I dismiss this aspect of the claim.

As the landlord’s claim has been partially successful I award the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5494638 — net $2,858.76 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rubbish removal	$482.20	Rubbish removal
Cleaning: Bathroom	$150.00	Cleaning: Bathroom
Cleaning: walls and drapes	$450.00	Cleaning: walls and drapes
Lock/key replacement	$188.56	Lock/key replacement
Repairs: 4 weeks rent limit - see 49B(3)(b)(ii) & 49B(4	$1,560.00	Repairs: 4 weeks rent limit - see 49B(3)(b)(ii) & 49B(4
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,858.76
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,858.76

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant’s and Landlord’s name and identifying details.
[The tenant/s] must pay [The landlord/s] $2,858.76 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
This tenancy initially began in 2011/2012. In 2024 the tenant’s father became unwell and from around this time there were relatively prolonged periods when she did not dwell at the tenancy but was staying with her father and family. There was also some time spent living in Samoa.
In October 2025, some rent payments were missed, and the landlord became aware that the property was empty. The matter came before the tribunal and on 2 February 2026, the tenancy was terminated as of 12 February 2026.
While the property was tenanted the faucet by which the toilet cistern is plumbed into the water supply had been damaged or failed in some way. This had leaked and the water had spread into the bedroom and the kitchen. Bedroom carpets were significantly affected by mould, and mould had grown on skirting boards and walls, curtains, and windowsills. Water had soaked into the bottom of the kitchen door, the bathroom door and draws, and the kitchen cabinetry kick boards and had blown out the MDF substrate of each.
There were also a large amount of the tenants goods lift in the premises along with rubbish, food that was in the fridge and pantry which had gone off, and other items.
The landlord has replaced the kitchen and bathroom doors, kitchen toe kicks, bathroom doors, and carpet throughout. Extensive cleaning has been necessary.
The landlord may claim to his insurer, however, the policy excludes gradual damage.
The landlord has claimed $11,002.91. This is composed of: a. the removal and disposal of the multi-damaged carpet $542.60; b. the replacement of the carpet $2700; c. the removal and dumping of rubbish $482.20; d. the deep cleaning of walls and skirtings to remove mould $150; e. the replacement of water damaged doors, kick boards, cabinetry, and skirting $5769.55; f. the cleaning and rehanging of curtains $450; g. the replacement of the lock $188.56; and h. two weeks rent while the tenants belongings were still left at the property $720. Tenant’s liability for damage
S 40(1)(c) and s40(e) RTA require a tenant to keep premises reasonably tidy, and at the end of the tenancy to remove all their goods and leave the premises and reasonably clean and tidy condition.
S 49A and s49B set limits on the extent to which the tenant can be liable for damage to premises.
S49B(2) and (3) say: (2) To the extent provided in subsection (3), the tenant is liable to the landlord for destruction of, or damage to, the premises that is caused by a careless act or omission of the tenant or of a person for whose actions the tenant is responsible under section 41 or 66L, other than an act or omission described in subsection (1). (3) The tenant’s liability under subsection (2) is limited,— (a)if the property is insured against the destruction or damage, to the lesser of the applicable excess under the insurance and whichever of the following is applicable: ... (ii) in any other case, the rent under the tenancy agreement for a period of 4 weeks; or (b) otherwise, to whichever of the following is applicable: ... (ii) in any other case, the rent under the tenancy agreement for a period of 4 weeks.
S 49B(4)(a) says: [I]f any insurance moneys that would otherwise have been payable because of the destruction or damage are irrecoverable because of an act or omission of the tenant ... for the purposes of subsection (3) the property is treated as not insured against the destruction or damage (and therefore subsection (3)(b) sets out the limit of the tenant’s liability under subsection (2));
In this case the damage would be likely to have been detected earlier had the tenant being present at the tenancy. Moreover, the landlord’s insurer has declined to pay for the damage as the initial damage had gradually worsened over time and was excluded as gradual damage.
This means that the tenant is liable for the water damage, as it has come about due to an omission on her part. However, S 49(3)(b)(ii) limits her liability to 4 weeks rent. This limit captures the damage and disposal of the carpets at paragraph [8] a. and b. and the replacement of doors and joinery at paragraph [8] e. As such I award the landlord $1560. Cleaning, rubbish removal and locks
A tenant is responsible for returning the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy fashion and free from rubbish. The evidence satisfies me that the cleaning conducted by the landlord was necessary, as such I award the landlord the $600 for the cleaning conducted. I am also satisfied that the rubbish removal was necessary and award the landlord $482.24 for the disposal of the rubbish.
The keys had not been returned at the time that the tenancy was terminated, I am satisfied that the replacement of the locks was appropriate and award the landlord $188.56. Rent
The landlord has claimed two weeks rent for the period after termination when the tenant’s goods were being stored in the carport. As discussed during the hearing this claim is legally problematic as the tenancy had ended by order of the Tribunal, and rent cannot be levied without a lease. I dismiss this aspect of the claim.
As the landlord’s claim has been partially successful I award the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5494638 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5494638 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions