What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5496154 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 5496154?

Cleaning: $230.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $80.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $150.00 awarded to tenant; Lawns and Garden Work: $483.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $47.90 awarded to landlord; Replace Missing Display Cabinet (Dep…: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Missing Window Latch: $40.00 awarded to landlord; Requirements: $70.00 awarded to tenant; Rubbish Removal: $172.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5496154?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5496154?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13797459-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5496154 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 5496154?

Cleaning: $230.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $80.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $150.00 awarded to tenant; Lawns and Garden Work: $483.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $47.90 awarded to landlord; Replace Missing Display Cabinet (Dep…: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Missing Window Latch: $40.00 awarded to landlord; Requirements: $70.00 awarded to tenant; Rubbish Removal: $172.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5496154?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5496154?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13797459-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5496154 — Cleanliness

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5496154 — net $873.40 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rubbish removal	$172.50		Rubbish removal
Cleaning (reduced	$230.00		Cleaning (reduced
Lawns and garden work (part charge	$483.00		Lawns and garden work (part charge
Replace missing window latch	$40.00		Replace missing window latch
Replace missing display cabinet (depreciated	$200.00		Replace missing display cabinet (depreciated
Repair cabinet (consent	$47.90		Repair cabinet (consent
Exemplary damages: late lodgement of bond		$150.00	late lodgement of bond
Exemplary damages: failure to comply with section 13A		$80.00	failure to comply with section 13A
requirements		$70.00	requirements
Total award	$1,173.40	$300.00
Net award	$873.40
Bond	$2,200.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$873.40

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the names and identifying details of both parties.
[The tenant/s] to pay [The landlord/s] $873.40 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below:
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,200.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: [The landlord/s]: $873.40 [The tenant/s]: $1,326.60

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 23 June 2026. The Tribunal was assisted by an interpreter.
The tenant has applied for compensation and/or exemplary damages for alleged breaches by the landlord of the provisions of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) and for a refund of the bond.
The landlord has applied for compensation, exemplary damages and a refund of the bond following the end of the tenancy. Background
The tenancy started on 20 July 2024 and ended on 7 January 2026.
The premises were newly renovated at the start of the tenancy. The premises were fully compliant with the Health Homes Standards (HHS) and were generally in a good condition.
The landlord did not lodge the bond with the Bond Centre until after the tenancy had ended.
During the tenancy the landlord renovated the bathroom. The tenant was without the use of the bathroom for about a week while the work was completed.
During the tenancy, which lasted about 18 months, the tenant made no written complaints to the landlord. More than 3 months after the tenancy ended, the tenant filed his application, following which the landlord cross applied.
I enquired whether the parties wanted to reach a settlement about the bond. The landlord was willing to, but the tenant was not. I continued to hear the applications in full.
Both parties have provided documentary evidence. The landlord’s evidence comprises many documents and photos.
I have considered everything placed before the Tribunal even if I do not specifically refer to it. Issues
The issues on the tenant’s application are these: •Did the landlord breach the tenant’s privacy by having a contractor do a healthy homes assessment when the propose of the notified visit was for another reason? If so, should the Tribunal award compensation? •Did the landlord fail to provide a HHS compliance statement and an insurance statement in the tenancy agreement? •Did the landlord fail to lodge the bond in time? •Should the tenant receive compensation for not having the use of the bathroom while it was being renovated? •Should the Tribunal award the tenant exemplary damages?
The issues on the landlord’s application are these: •Has the landlord proved claims for rubbish removal, cleaning, and gardening work? •Should the landlord receive compensation for the repair of a missing window latch? •Should the landlord receive compensation for a missing display cabinet? •Should the landlord’s time for restoring a damaged TV display cabinet be compensated? •Did the tenant unlawfully sublet the premises creating an insurance risk? Relevant law
Section 13A RTA sets out what must be contained in a tenancy agreement.
Section 19 RTA sets out the duties of a landlord on receipt of the bond.
Section 40 RTA sets out a tenant’s responsibilities. Included among them are the responsibility to pay rent when due; to keep the premises reasonably clean and tidy; to leave the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy condition; to repair any careless or intentional damage beyond fair wear and tear, and to quit the premises when the tenancy ends.
Section 45 RTA sets out a landlord’s responsibilities. Included among them are the responsibility to provide the premises in a reasonably clean state; to provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair (having regard to the age and character of the premises); and to comply with the Healthy Homes Standards (HHS). Compensation and exemplary damages
The Tribunal may award compensation to a party for losses arising from a proven breach or breaches by the other party of their statutory responsibilities.
Compensation is generally awarded for actual losses and sometimes for less tangible effects of proven breaches such as a loss of enjoyment of the tenancy and the accompanying stress and anxiety.
In Birch v Otautahi Community Housing Trust 1 the District Court confirmed that the Tribunal must consider the following factors when deciding to award compensation: • The nature of the breach; • The duration of the breach; and • The effect of the breach on the party.
Exemplary damages are different. They are designed to punish and to deter. They are like a fine.
Exemplary damages are awarded at the Tribunal’s discretion when one party has proved that the other party has committed a defined unlawful act. If that is proven, and before the Tribunal may award exemplary damages, it must take account of the factors set out in section 109 RTA. Those factors are: • The intention of the person; • The effect of the unlawful act; • The interests of the party against whom the unlawful act was committed; and • The public interest. Discussion Did the landlord breach the tenant’s privacy by having a contractor do a healthy homes assessment when the propose of the notified visit was for another reason? If so, should the Tribunal award compensation? 1 [2020] NZDC 17667
This is a technical breach. The tenant agreed to a visit for the purpose of someone viewing the premises. The landlord also arranged a contractor to do a HHS inspection and report at the same time.
The landlord said he arranged the contractor to attend at the same time as the agreed visitor to avoid disruption to the tenant and to minimise the intrusion.
I do not find any actual breach of the tenant’s privacy because the contractor attended at the time of an arranged visit for another purpose. Even is there was a breach it was minor and had no objective effect on the tenant. The tenant sought compensation of $200.00. I make no award of compensation as he suffered no compensable loss. Did the landlord fail to provide a HHS compliance statement and an insurance statement in the tenancy agreement?
The tenancy agreement did not contain the HHS compliance and insurance statements that are required by section 13A(1CA) and (2) RTA. A failure to include those statements is a defined unlawful act for which exemplary damages up to $750.00 may be awarded.

Did the landlord fail to lodge the bond in time?

The landlord accepts that he did not lodge the bond within 23-wroding days after the payment was made. A failure to lodge the bond within time is an unlawful act for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to $1,500.00. Should the tenant receive compensation for not having the use of the bathroom while it was being renovated?
The landlord advised the tenant of the renovation to the bathroom and offered to assist with any disruption. The text messages produced in evidence suggest that the tenant did not require any assistance as he was able to access shower facilities at his sister’s house.
The landlord said he had always tried to support the tenant. He reduced the rent 3 times and had spent almost $10,000.00 on renovations.
Compensation usually follows a breach by (in this case) the landlord. Here there was no breach. The landlord notified the tenant about the renovation and the tenant appears to have accepted that and to have worked around it.
I accept that there was some disruption for about a week, but the tenant agreed to the work going ahead. He mentioned compensation for the contractor using his electricity. That cannot be quantified but is probably minimal. I award the tenant compensation of $70.00.

Should the Tribunal award the tenant exemplary damages?

The landlord said that he was a first-time landlord and that the failure to include the required statements in the tenancy agreement and to lodge the bond within time were oversights due to his inexperience.
I have considered that explanation and I have awarded exemplary damages at the low end of what the Tribunal can award.
I find that the statutory criteria for awarding exemplary damages are met in this case. When a person becomes a landlord, they have a duty to become familiar with their statutory responsibilities. Ignorance of the law is no defence.
For the long delay before lodging the bond I award the tenant exemplary damages of $150.00. Had the landlord never lodged the bond I would have awarded more. But the bond is at the Bond Centre and is protected. For the failure to include HHS and insurance statements in the tenancy agreement I award the tenant exemplary damages of $80.00.
The tenant sought compensation of $500.00 for the failure to include these statements. The appropriate remedy is exemplary damages. The tenant suffered no objective loss for which compensation should be awarded. Has the landlord proved claims for rubbish removal, cleaning, and gardening work?
The landlord’s claims for rubbish removal, cleaning, and gardening are proved by pre and end of tenancy photos and by the invoices produced in evidence.
The tenant accepted that he asked the landlord to remove the rubbish and to arrange for cleaning to be done. I have reduced the claim for cleaning because a tenant must leave the premises only reasonably clean, not clean to a ‘motel’ standard or to a standard where a new tenancy can begin. Landlords must expect to have to do some cleaning between tenancies. The invoice for this work refers to a ‘deep clean’ and to cleaning the outside of the windows which is not a tenant responsibility. Should the landlord receive compensation for the repair of a missing window latch?
I find this claim proved. The tenant said he suspected one of his children broke the latch and he did not have the tools to repair it.

Should the landlord receive compensation for a missing display cabinet?

The tenant accepted the landlord’s claim for a missing display cabinet, but he did not accept the replacement cost.
The landlord produced evidence of on-line searches to find an equivalent cabinet.
I have assessed the photographic and other evidence. I award the landlord compensation of $200.00 to take depreciation and fair wear and tear into account. Should the landlord’s time for restoring a damaged TV display cabinet be compensated?
The tenant accepted the landlord’s claim for 2 hours labour to repair a TV display cabinet. The claim is objectively reasonable. I allow this claim by consent.

Did the tenant unlawfully sublet the premises creating an insurance risk?

The landlord alleges that the tenant unlawfully sublet part of the premises and created an insurance risk.
This claim cannot succeed. The tenancy agreement was signed by 3 adult tenants, including the tenant’s sister. She could not reside at the premises so the tenant took another person in to rent the bedroom his sister would have used.
This was not a sublease arrangement; it was akin to taking in a flatmate or boarder. It did not require the landlord’s consent, nor must a landlord disclose to their insurer the name of every tenant and their flatmate or boarder residing at the premises.
A sub-lease is generally a situation where the tenant vacates the tenancy completely and finds a replacement tenant or tenants. That did not happen here.
The tenancy agreement did not limit the number of occupants. The landlord knew there were 3 adults and 3 children. That one adult was replaced by another adult did not alter any perceived insurance risk at all. The number of occupants was the same. I dismiss this part of the landlord’s application. Result
The tenant’s claims are successful in the amount of $300.00.
The landlord’s claims are successful in the amount of $1,173.40.
The bond will be split between the parties - $1,326.60 to the tenant and $873.40 to the landlord.
I make no order for the reimbursement of the filing fees the parties incurred. Each has been successful in part. An award to one would be cancelled by an award to the other. Name suppression
Both parties have sought name suppression. As each party has succeeded in part, I grant name suppression to them both 2 .

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5496154 — net $873.40 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rubbish removal	$172.50		Rubbish removal
Cleaning (reduced	$230.00		Cleaning (reduced
Lawns and garden work (part charge	$483.00		Lawns and garden work (part charge
Replace missing window latch	$40.00		Replace missing window latch
Replace missing display cabinet (depreciated	$200.00		Replace missing display cabinet (depreciated
Repair cabinet (consent	$47.90		Repair cabinet (consent
Exemplary damages: late lodgement of bond		$150.00	late lodgement of bond
Exemplary damages: failure to comply with section 13A		$80.00	failure to comply with section 13A
requirements		$70.00	requirements
Total award	$1,173.40	$300.00
Net award	$873.40
Bond	$2,200.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$873.40

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the names and identifying details of both parties.
[The tenant/s] to pay [The landlord/s] $873.40 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below:
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,200.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: [The landlord/s]: $873.40 [The tenant/s]: $1,326.60

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 23 June 2026. The Tribunal was assisted by an interpreter.
The tenant has applied for compensation and/or exemplary damages for alleged breaches by the landlord of the provisions of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) and for a refund of the bond.
The landlord has applied for compensation, exemplary damages and a refund of the bond following the end of the tenancy. Background
The tenancy started on 20 July 2024 and ended on 7 January 2026.
The premises were newly renovated at the start of the tenancy. The premises were fully compliant with the Health Homes Standards (HHS) and were generally in a good condition.
The landlord did not lodge the bond with the Bond Centre until after the tenancy had ended.
During the tenancy the landlord renovated the bathroom. The tenant was without the use of the bathroom for about a week while the work was completed.
During the tenancy, which lasted about 18 months, the tenant made no written complaints to the landlord. More than 3 months after the tenancy ended, the tenant filed his application, following which the landlord cross applied.
I enquired whether the parties wanted to reach a settlement about the bond. The landlord was willing to, but the tenant was not. I continued to hear the applications in full.
Both parties have provided documentary evidence. The landlord’s evidence comprises many documents and photos.
I have considered everything placed before the Tribunal even if I do not specifically refer to it. Issues
The issues on the tenant’s application are these: •Did the landlord breach the tenant’s privacy by having a contractor do a healthy homes assessment when the propose of the notified visit was for another reason? If so, should the Tribunal award compensation? •Did the landlord fail to provide a HHS compliance statement and an insurance statement in the tenancy agreement? •Did the landlord fail to lodge the bond in time? •Should the tenant receive compensation for not having the use of the bathroom while it was being renovated? •Should the Tribunal award the tenant exemplary damages?
The issues on the landlord’s application are these: •Has the landlord proved claims for rubbish removal, cleaning, and gardening work? •Should the landlord receive compensation for the repair of a missing window latch? •Should the landlord receive compensation for a missing display cabinet? •Should the landlord’s time for restoring a damaged TV display cabinet be compensated? •Did the tenant unlawfully sublet the premises creating an insurance risk? Relevant law
Section 13A RTA sets out what must be contained in a tenancy agreement.
Section 19 RTA sets out the duties of a landlord on receipt of the bond.
Section 40 RTA sets out a tenant’s responsibilities. Included among them are the responsibility to pay rent when due; to keep the premises reasonably clean and tidy; to leave the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy condition; to repair any careless or intentional damage beyond fair wear and tear, and to quit the premises when the tenancy ends.
Section 45 RTA sets out a landlord’s responsibilities. Included among them are the responsibility to provide the premises in a reasonably clean state; to provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair (having regard to the age and character of the premises); and to comply with the Healthy Homes Standards (HHS). Compensation and exemplary damages
The Tribunal may award compensation to a party for losses arising from a proven breach or breaches by the other party of their statutory responsibilities.
Compensation is generally awarded for actual losses and sometimes for less tangible effects of proven breaches such as a loss of enjoyment of the tenancy and the accompanying stress and anxiety.
In Birch v Otautahi Community Housing Trust 1 the District Court confirmed that the Tribunal must consider the following factors when deciding to award compensation: • The nature of the breach; • The duration of the breach; and • The effect of the breach on the party.
Exemplary damages are different. They are designed to punish and to deter. They are like a fine.
Exemplary damages are awarded at the Tribunal’s discretion when one party has proved that the other party has committed a defined unlawful act. If that is proven, and before the Tribunal may award exemplary damages, it must take account of the factors set out in section 109 RTA. Those factors are: • The intention of the person; • The effect of the unlawful act; • The interests of the party against whom the unlawful act was committed; and • The public interest. Discussion Did the landlord breach the tenant’s privacy by having a contractor do a healthy homes assessment when the propose of the notified visit was for another reason? If so, should the Tribunal award compensation? 1 [2020] NZDC 17667
This is a technical breach. The tenant agreed to a visit for the purpose of someone viewing the premises. The landlord also arranged a contractor to do a HHS inspection and report at the same time.
The landlord said he arranged the contractor to attend at the same time as the agreed visitor to avoid disruption to the tenant and to minimise the intrusion.
I do not find any actual breach of the tenant’s privacy because the contractor attended at the time of an arranged visit for another purpose. Even is there was a breach it was minor and had no objective effect on the tenant. The tenant sought compensation of $200.00. I make no award of compensation as he suffered no compensable loss. Did the landlord fail to provide a HHS compliance statement and an insurance statement in the tenancy agreement?
The tenancy agreement did not contain the HHS compliance and insurance statements that are required by section 13A(1CA) and (2) RTA. A failure to include those statements is a defined unlawful act for which exemplary damages up to $750.00 may be awarded.

Did the landlord fail to lodge the bond in time?

The landlord accepts that he did not lodge the bond within 23-wroding days after the payment was made. A failure to lodge the bond within time is an unlawful act for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to $1,500.00. Should the tenant receive compensation for not having the use of the bathroom while it was being renovated?
The landlord advised the tenant of the renovation to the bathroom and offered to assist with any disruption. The text messages produced in evidence suggest that the tenant did not require any assistance as he was able to access shower facilities at his sister’s house.
The landlord said he had always tried to support the tenant. He reduced the rent 3 times and had spent almost $10,000.00 on renovations.
Compensation usually follows a breach by (in this case) the landlord. Here there was no breach. The landlord notified the tenant about the renovation and the tenant appears to have accepted that and to have worked around it.
I accept that there was some disruption for about a week, but the tenant agreed to the work going ahead. He mentioned compensation for the contractor using his electricity. That cannot be quantified but is probably minimal. I award the tenant compensation of $70.00.

Should the Tribunal award the tenant exemplary damages?

The landlord said that he was a first-time landlord and that the failure to include the required statements in the tenancy agreement and to lodge the bond within time were oversights due to his inexperience.
I have considered that explanation and I have awarded exemplary damages at the low end of what the Tribunal can award.
I find that the statutory criteria for awarding exemplary damages are met in this case. When a person becomes a landlord, they have a duty to become familiar with their statutory responsibilities. Ignorance of the law is no defence.
For the long delay before lodging the bond I award the tenant exemplary damages of $150.00. Had the landlord never lodged the bond I would have awarded more. But the bond is at the Bond Centre and is protected. For the failure to include HHS and insurance statements in the tenancy agreement I award the tenant exemplary damages of $80.00.
The tenant sought compensation of $500.00 for the failure to include these statements. The appropriate remedy is exemplary damages. The tenant suffered no objective loss for which compensation should be awarded. Has the landlord proved claims for rubbish removal, cleaning, and gardening work?
The landlord’s claims for rubbish removal, cleaning, and gardening are proved by pre and end of tenancy photos and by the invoices produced in evidence.
The tenant accepted that he asked the landlord to remove the rubbish and to arrange for cleaning to be done. I have reduced the claim for cleaning because a tenant must leave the premises only reasonably clean, not clean to a ‘motel’ standard or to a standard where a new tenancy can begin. Landlords must expect to have to do some cleaning between tenancies. The invoice for this work refers to a ‘deep clean’ and to cleaning the outside of the windows which is not a tenant responsibility. Should the landlord receive compensation for the repair of a missing window latch?
I find this claim proved. The tenant said he suspected one of his children broke the latch and he did not have the tools to repair it.

Should the landlord receive compensation for a missing display cabinet?

The tenant accepted the landlord’s claim for a missing display cabinet, but he did not accept the replacement cost.
The landlord produced evidence of on-line searches to find an equivalent cabinet.
I have assessed the photographic and other evidence. I award the landlord compensation of $200.00 to take depreciation and fair wear and tear into account. Should the landlord’s time for restoring a damaged TV display cabinet be compensated?
The tenant accepted the landlord’s claim for 2 hours labour to repair a TV display cabinet. The claim is objectively reasonable. I allow this claim by consent.

Did the tenant unlawfully sublet the premises creating an insurance risk?

The landlord alleges that the tenant unlawfully sublet part of the premises and created an insurance risk.
This claim cannot succeed. The tenancy agreement was signed by 3 adult tenants, including the tenant’s sister. She could not reside at the premises so the tenant took another person in to rent the bedroom his sister would have used.
This was not a sublease arrangement; it was akin to taking in a flatmate or boarder. It did not require the landlord’s consent, nor must a landlord disclose to their insurer the name of every tenant and their flatmate or boarder residing at the premises.
A sub-lease is generally a situation where the tenant vacates the tenancy completely and finds a replacement tenant or tenants. That did not happen here.
The tenancy agreement did not limit the number of occupants. The landlord knew there were 3 adults and 3 children. That one adult was replaced by another adult did not alter any perceived insurance risk at all. The number of occupants was the same. I dismiss this part of the landlord’s application. Result
The tenant’s claims are successful in the amount of $300.00.
The landlord’s claims are successful in the amount of $1,173.40.
The bond will be split between the parties - $1,326.60 to the tenant and $873.40 to the landlord.
I make no order for the reimbursement of the filing fees the parties incurred. Each has been successful in part. An award to one would be cancelled by an award to the other. Name suppression
Both parties have sought name suppression. As each party has succeeded in part, I grant name suppression to them both 2 .

Tenancy Tribunal case 5496154 — Cleanliness

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5496154 — Cleanliness

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Did the landlord fail to lodge the bond in time?

Should the Tribunal award the tenant exemplary damages?

Should the landlord receive compensation for a missing display cabinet?

Did the tenant unlawfully sublet the premises creating an insurance risk?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Did the landlord fail to lodge the bond in time?

Should the Tribunal award the tenant exemplary damages?

Should the landlord receive compensation for a missing display cabinet?

Did the tenant unlawfully sublet the premises creating an insurance risk?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions