What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5504230 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] must pay Rentals.Co Limited As Agents For A Blake

How much money was awarded in case 5504230?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Gas Bottle: $48.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,160.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5504230?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5504230?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13916063-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5504230 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] must pay Rentals.Co Limited As Agents For A Blake

How much money was awarded in case 5504230?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Gas Bottle: $48.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,160.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5504230?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5504230?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13916063-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

140B Whau Valley Road, Whau Valley, Whangarei 0112 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5504230 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5504230 — net $2,236.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$2,160.00	Rent arrears
Gas bottle	$48.00	Gas bottle
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,236.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,236.00

Order

[The tenant/s] must pay Rentals.Co Limited As Agents For A Blake $2,236.00 immediately, being rent arrears to 16 March 2026.
The Tenants application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The Landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The Tenant has applied for refund of the bond, compensation and exemplary damages.
The tenancy commenced on 22 December 2025 and was fixed to 17 January 2026.

How much is owed for rent arrears?

The tenancy ended on 16 March 2026. The Landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy. The Tenant disputed the end date stating the tenancy should have ended earlier because she gave notice however there was no evidence of the notice she gave.
The amount ordered is proved. Landlords claim for gas.
The Landlord sought reimbursement of $48.00 for the cost of filling the gas bottle, stating that they arranged and paid for the gas as a courtesy because the Tenant had not organised a gas supply before moving into the property.
The Tenant disputed this claim, asserting that the gas bottle was not full when she moved into the premises.
In considering the evidence, I note that the Tenant did not dispute that the Landlord paid $48.00 for the gas and deposited this amount into the Tenant's account. The tenancy agreement did not include that the Landlord cover the cost of gas. The Tenant was responsible for arranging and paying for her own gas supply.
The amount ordered is proved. Tenants claim for compensation.
The Tenant claimed $10,000.00 in compensation because the condition of the property caused damage to her belongings, her medical issues, accommodation costs, lost employment opportunities and distress suffered during her tenancy.
The Tenant submitted that shortly after moving into the property she noticed a strong smell of urine everywhere, animal fur on the furniture, an unclean mattress, and other unsanitary conditions. She said these conditions caused an allergic reaction, swollen eyes, pneumonia, and hospitalisation. She claimed she had not suffered these health issues before moving into the property and was forced to sleep in her car or pay for other accommodation because of her health.
The Tenant also alleged there was mould in the couch, bees around the property, missing net curtains and a television, tar in the washing machine that stained her clothing, no power or hot water when she moved in, and a loose window that later fell out. She said the odour in the property prevented her from sleeping.
The Tenant says they repeatedly raised these concerns with the Landlord but received little or no response. When she first moved in and noted the urine smell straight away, she rang the Landlord, and they said if she wanted to leave she could but it was not the Landlord’s problem.
Due to the condition of the property, the Tenant says they could not safely remain there and incurred costs of paying for alternative accommodation and sleeping in their car on several occasions. The Tenant stated she was hospitalised and suffered from pneumonia due to the property making her sicker.
The Tenant claims they were unable to start employment as a housekeeper at Cordis hotel because of the effect of her living situation on her health. The Tenant also says they experienced significant stress, hardship, and emotional distress as a result of the Landlord's actions and the condition of the premises.
In support of this, the Tenant submitted text messages between the Tenant and the Landlord confirming her complaints. The Landlords responses included requesting photographs of the damaged window so they could organise the repairs.
The Landlord disputed the compensation saying she submitted that the Tenant viewed the property before entering into the tenancy. and there were no net curtains at the time of the viewing. The tenancy agreement also did not include a television as a chattel.
The Tenant was given possession of the property on 22 December 2025. At that time, the Landlord recalls there was an issue with a blue floor mat that required cleaning but nothing else was raised by the Tenant.
On 24 December 2025, the Tenant complained to the Landlord that the water had an unpleasant odour. The Landlord says they arranged for a plumber to attend. The Landlord submitted that the Tenant still did not complain about the urine smell and that allegation was raised later.
The Landlord submits that the Tenant made numerous complaints over a short period, including concerns that the bed frame was caused bruising to her legs, the washing machine stained her clothing, there was mould throughout the property, there was a lack of hot water and electricity, and a faulty bedroom window. The Landlord acknowledges that the gas bottle had not been filled before the tenancy commenced however the Landlord transferred $48.00 to the Tenant to cover the cost of filling the gas bottle, noting that the Tenant was responsible for arranging and paying for the gas supply. The Landlord denies that the washing machine contained tar or that animals had been kept in the property, causing a urine smell. They stated the Tenant had moved the washing machine outside of the property.
In considering the evidence, I find the Tenant has not established her claims on the balance of probabilities. There was no independent evidence to substantiate many of her allegations. For example, the Tenant did not provide photographs of the damaged window or clothing said to have been stained by the washing machine. The tenancy agreement made the Tenant responsible for arranging and paying for the water, gas, and electricity services. While the Tenant later alleged that the property smelt of urine throughout, there is no independent evidence supporting that, and it was not raised as an initial concern. The Tenant also did not provide evidence confirming the loss of employment, such as an offer of employment or correspondence from the employer. Similarly, no medical records, hospital documentation, or expert evidence was provided to establish that the condition of the property caused or contributed to the Tenant's alleged health issues. The Tenant provided text messages showing that she complained about the damaged window yet when the Landlord asked her to send a photograph of the damage so they could organise the appropriate person to repair it, the Tenant failed to do so and spoke about her other issues.
The claim is dismissed.
The Tenant claimed exemplary damages, alleging that the property smelt of urine, that a television advertised with the property was not provided, that the mattress was unclean and caused asthma and other health issues, that the Landlord treated her poorly, and that the Landlord was selling drugs from the upstairs dwelling. There was no evidence to support any of these claims.
The Landlord disputed these allegations and submitted that subsequent Tenants occupied the property without making any complaints about urine odours or similar issues.
In considering the evidence, the Tenant has not proved the Landlord committed an unlawful act. The allegations are unsupported by independent evidence.
The claim is dismissed.
As the Tenant has not been successful, name suppression is not granted to the Tenant. As the Landlord has been wholly successful, the Tenant shall reimburse the filing fee. Name suppression was not sought by the Landlord.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5504230 — net $2,236.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$2,160.00	Rent arrears
Gas bottle	$48.00	Gas bottle
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,236.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,236.00

Order

[The tenant/s] must pay Rentals.Co Limited As Agents For A Blake $2,236.00 immediately, being rent arrears to 16 March 2026.
The Tenants application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The Landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The Tenant has applied for refund of the bond, compensation and exemplary damages.
The tenancy commenced on 22 December 2025 and was fixed to 17 January 2026.

How much is owed for rent arrears?

The tenancy ended on 16 March 2026. The Landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy. The Tenant disputed the end date stating the tenancy should have ended earlier because she gave notice however there was no evidence of the notice she gave.
The amount ordered is proved. Landlords claim for gas.
The Landlord sought reimbursement of $48.00 for the cost of filling the gas bottle, stating that they arranged and paid for the gas as a courtesy because the Tenant had not organised a gas supply before moving into the property.
The Tenant disputed this claim, asserting that the gas bottle was not full when she moved into the premises.
In considering the evidence, I note that the Tenant did not dispute that the Landlord paid $48.00 for the gas and deposited this amount into the Tenant's account. The tenancy agreement did not include that the Landlord cover the cost of gas. The Tenant was responsible for arranging and paying for her own gas supply.
The amount ordered is proved. Tenants claim for compensation.
The Tenant claimed $10,000.00 in compensation because the condition of the property caused damage to her belongings, her medical issues, accommodation costs, lost employment opportunities and distress suffered during her tenancy.
The Tenant submitted that shortly after moving into the property she noticed a strong smell of urine everywhere, animal fur on the furniture, an unclean mattress, and other unsanitary conditions. She said these conditions caused an allergic reaction, swollen eyes, pneumonia, and hospitalisation. She claimed she had not suffered these health issues before moving into the property and was forced to sleep in her car or pay for other accommodation because of her health.
The Tenant also alleged there was mould in the couch, bees around the property, missing net curtains and a television, tar in the washing machine that stained her clothing, no power or hot water when she moved in, and a loose window that later fell out. She said the odour in the property prevented her from sleeping.
The Tenant says they repeatedly raised these concerns with the Landlord but received little or no response. When she first moved in and noted the urine smell straight away, she rang the Landlord, and they said if she wanted to leave she could but it was not the Landlord’s problem.
Due to the condition of the property, the Tenant says they could not safely remain there and incurred costs of paying for alternative accommodation and sleeping in their car on several occasions. The Tenant stated she was hospitalised and suffered from pneumonia due to the property making her sicker.
The Tenant claims they were unable to start employment as a housekeeper at Cordis hotel because of the effect of her living situation on her health. The Tenant also says they experienced significant stress, hardship, and emotional distress as a result of the Landlord's actions and the condition of the premises.
In support of this, the Tenant submitted text messages between the Tenant and the Landlord confirming her complaints. The Landlords responses included requesting photographs of the damaged window so they could organise the repairs.
The Landlord disputed the compensation saying she submitted that the Tenant viewed the property before entering into the tenancy. and there were no net curtains at the time of the viewing. The tenancy agreement also did not include a television as a chattel.
The Tenant was given possession of the property on 22 December 2025. At that time, the Landlord recalls there was an issue with a blue floor mat that required cleaning but nothing else was raised by the Tenant.
On 24 December 2025, the Tenant complained to the Landlord that the water had an unpleasant odour. The Landlord says they arranged for a plumber to attend. The Landlord submitted that the Tenant still did not complain about the urine smell and that allegation was raised later.
The Landlord submits that the Tenant made numerous complaints over a short period, including concerns that the bed frame was caused bruising to her legs, the washing machine stained her clothing, there was mould throughout the property, there was a lack of hot water and electricity, and a faulty bedroom window. The Landlord acknowledges that the gas bottle had not been filled before the tenancy commenced however the Landlord transferred $48.00 to the Tenant to cover the cost of filling the gas bottle, noting that the Tenant was responsible for arranging and paying for the gas supply. The Landlord denies that the washing machine contained tar or that animals had been kept in the property, causing a urine smell. They stated the Tenant had moved the washing machine outside of the property.
In considering the evidence, I find the Tenant has not established her claims on the balance of probabilities. There was no independent evidence to substantiate many of her allegations. For example, the Tenant did not provide photographs of the damaged window or clothing said to have been stained by the washing machine. The tenancy agreement made the Tenant responsible for arranging and paying for the water, gas, and electricity services. While the Tenant later alleged that the property smelt of urine throughout, there is no independent evidence supporting that, and it was not raised as an initial concern. The Tenant also did not provide evidence confirming the loss of employment, such as an offer of employment or correspondence from the employer. Similarly, no medical records, hospital documentation, or expert evidence was provided to establish that the condition of the property caused or contributed to the Tenant's alleged health issues. The Tenant provided text messages showing that she complained about the damaged window yet when the Landlord asked her to send a photograph of the damage so they could organise the appropriate person to repair it, the Tenant failed to do so and spoke about her other issues.
The claim is dismissed.
The Tenant claimed exemplary damages, alleging that the property smelt of urine, that a television advertised with the property was not provided, that the mattress was unclean and caused asthma and other health issues, that the Landlord treated her poorly, and that the Landlord was selling drugs from the upstairs dwelling. There was no evidence to support any of these claims.
The Landlord disputed these allegations and submitted that subsequent Tenants occupied the property without making any complaints about urine odours or similar issues.
In considering the evidence, the Tenant has not proved the Landlord committed an unlawful act. The allegations are unsupported by independent evidence.
The claim is dismissed.
As the Tenant has not been successful, name suppression is not granted to the Tenant. As the Landlord has been wholly successful, the Tenant shall reimburse the filing fee. Name suppression was not sought by the Landlord.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5504230 — Rent arrears at 140B Whau Valley Road, Whau Valley, Whangarei 0112

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5504230 — Rent arrears at 140B Whau Valley Road, Whau Valley, Whangarei 0112

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent arrears?

Topics & place

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent arrears?

Topics & place

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions