What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5507170 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 5507170?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Loss Of Rents 21 March 2026: $4,164.28 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $170.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $2,225.25 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $326.91 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,642.86 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $400.00 awarded to landlord; Smoke Alarms: $40.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5507170?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Rent arrears, Smoke alarms.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5507170?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13834272-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5507170 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 5507170?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Loss Of Rents 21 March 2026: $4,164.28 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $170.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $2,225.25 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $326.91 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,642.86 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $400.00 awarded to landlord; Smoke Alarms: $40.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5507170?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Rent arrears, Smoke alarms.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5507170?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13834272-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5507170 — Property damage

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5507170 — net $6,797.30 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 20 March 2026	$1,642.86	Rent arrears to 20 March 2026
Loss of rents 21 March 2026 to 12 May 2026	$4,164.28	Loss of rents 21 March 2026 to 12 May 2026
Cleaning and rubbish removal	$400.00	Cleaning and rubbish removal
Lock/key replacement	$170.00	Lock/key replacement
Replace vanity and repair wall damage	$2,225.25	Replace vanity and repair wall damage
Replace smoke alarm	$40.00	Replace smoke alarm
Window repairs	$326.91	Window repairs
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$6,797.30
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$6,797.30

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not attend and couldn’t be reached by phone on the number given in the application.

The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. The landlord has received the bond.

How much is owed for rent?

The parties engaged in mediation. A Mediator’s Order was made on 5 February 2026 (application 5430299) requiring the tenant to make payments of rent and arrears. A conditional termination clause was included.

The tenant breached that Order and the landlord sought her eviction. That happened on 20 March 2026.

The landlord has provided rent records proving the amount owed to that date. Loss of rents

The tenancy was for a fixed term from 12 May 2025 to 12 May 2026. The landlord’s evidence is that after the tenant vacated, it arranged for the property to be repaired and cleaned. It was then advertised as available for rent. The advertised rent was reduced to try and attract tenants but without success. The owners then decided to sell. The premises have been vacant since the tenant left.

Thew owners made a claim under their insurance, but it was declined on the basis that the bond had to be applied to the unpaid rent.

The landlord has suffered a loss of the rent payable under the tenancy from 20 March 2026 to the end of the fixed term on 12 May. That loss was caused by the tenant’s breach of her obligations.

A landlord or tenant who claims compensation for loss caused by the other party’s breach of their obligations, must take all reasonable steps to limit that loss 1 .

The landlord’s evidence satisfies me that all reasonable steps were taken to try and re-rent then sell the premises to limit the loss. The landlord is entitled to compensation for the lost rent. 1 S.49 RTA

The landlord also claims compensation for loss of rent from the adjoining premises of which it also the landlord. The landlord says those tenants moved out because of harassing/ threatening behaviour by Ms Petrie.

Those tenants also had a fixed term tenancy. The landlord released them from the tenancy, causing loss of rent.

Landlords must, “...take all reasonable steps to ensure that [The party] of the landlord’s other tenants causes or permits any interference with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of the tenant in the use of the premises.” 2 .

The evidence does not show that there were no reasonable steps available to the landlord to address any anti-social behaviour by Ms Petrie, short of agreeing to end the neighbour’s tenancy. There is only very limited evidence about that behaviour.

While there is a connection between Ms Petrie’s actions and the end of the adjoining tenancy, the direct cause was the landlord’s decision to allow that fixed term tenancy to be ended, which it was not legally obliged to do. That claim is dismissed.

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 3 .

Exit inspection photos show that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish.

The tenant did not return the keys.

The landlord had to replace a smoke alarm.

The amounts ordered are proved by invoices paid by the landlord.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

A landlord must prove that damage to the premises occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. If this is established, to avoid liability, the tenant must prove they did not carelessly or intentionally cause or permit the 2 S.45(1)(e) RTA 3 S.40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) RTA damage. Tenants are liable for the actions of people at the premises with their permission 4 .

Where the damage is caused carelessly, and is covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to the lesser of the insurance excess or four weeks' rent 5 .

Tenants are liable for the cost of repairing damage that is intentional or which results from any activity at the premises that is an imprisonable offence. This applies to anything the tenant does and anything done by a person they are responsible for 6 .

Exit inspection photographs provided by the landlord show that during the tenancy: a. a glass pane in a door was broken; b. there were holes in some walls and both the drawers and sink in the bathroom vanity were damaged, requiring it to be replaced.

The cost of the repair work is proved by the invoices provided.

The owners tried to bring a claim under their insurance but the insurer assessed the damage as resulting from multiple events, with a $1,000.00 excess applicable to each.

The only single claim item higher than that excess is for replacement of the vanity. Because the evidence shows the damage to the vanity (removal and breaking of drawers, cigarette burns on the sink) is more likely than to have been intentional, the tenant’s liability to compensate for its replacement is not limited by s.49B(3)(a).

The landlord’s evidence satisfies me that replacement of the vanity was “like for like” with no betterment value that needs to be allowed for. Bailiff’s Fee

The landlord seeks recovery of the $267.00 fee paid to the bailiff on eviction.

It is a cost flowing from the tenant's breach of her obligation to quit the premises on termination so is recoverable. However it is a cost that is automatically included by the District Court’s process when the landlord seeks to enforce an 4 S.40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA. 5 S.49B(3)(a) RTA. 6 S 49B(1) RTA. order through the District Court. It is not awarded to avoid potential duplication of the cost.

Because the landlord has substantially succeeded with its claims, I reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5507170 — net $6,797.30 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 20 March 2026	$1,642.86	Rent arrears to 20 March 2026
Loss of rents 21 March 2026 to 12 May 2026	$4,164.28	Loss of rents 21 March 2026 to 12 May 2026
Cleaning and rubbish removal	$400.00	Cleaning and rubbish removal
Lock/key replacement	$170.00	Lock/key replacement
Replace vanity and repair wall damage	$2,225.25	Replace vanity and repair wall damage
Replace smoke alarm	$40.00	Replace smoke alarm
Window repairs	$326.91	Window repairs
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$6,797.30
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$6,797.30

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details and the property address.
[The tenant/s] must pay [The applicant/s] $6,797.30 immediately, calculated below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not attend and couldn’t be reached by phone on the number given in the application.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. The landlord has received the bond.

How much is owed for rent?

The parties engaged in mediation. A Mediator’s Order was made on 5 February 2026 (application 5430299) requiring the tenant to make payments of rent and arrears. A conditional termination clause was included.
The tenant breached that Order and the landlord sought her eviction. That happened on 20 March 2026.
The landlord has provided rent records proving the amount owed to that date. Loss of rents
The tenancy was for a fixed term from 12 May 2025 to 12 May 2026. The landlord’s evidence is that after the tenant vacated, it arranged for the property to be repaired and cleaned. It was then advertised as available for rent. The advertised rent was reduced to try and attract tenants but without success. The owners then decided to sell. The premises have been vacant since the tenant left.
Thew owners made a claim under their insurance, but it was declined on the basis that the bond had to be applied to the unpaid rent.
The landlord has suffered a loss of the rent payable under the tenancy from 20 March 2026 to the end of the fixed term on 12 May. That loss was caused by the tenant’s breach of her obligations.
A landlord or tenant who claims compensation for loss caused by the other party’s breach of their obligations, must take all reasonable steps to limit that loss 1 .
The landlord’s evidence satisfies me that all reasonable steps were taken to try and re-rent then sell the premises to limit the loss. The landlord is entitled to compensation for the lost rent. 1 S.49 RTA
The landlord also claims compensation for loss of rent from the adjoining premises of which it also the landlord. The landlord says those tenants moved out because of harassing/ threatening behaviour by Ms Petrie.
Those tenants also had a fixed term tenancy. The landlord released them from the tenancy, causing loss of rent.
Landlords must, “...take all reasonable steps to ensure that [The party] of the landlord’s other tenants causes or permits any interference with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of the tenant in the use of the premises.” 2 .
The evidence does not show that there were no reasonable steps available to the landlord to address any anti-social behaviour by Ms Petrie, short of agreeing to end the neighbour’s tenancy. There is only very limited evidence about that behaviour.
While there is a connection between Ms Petrie’s actions and the end of the adjoining tenancy, the direct cause was the landlord’s decision to allow that fixed term tenancy to be ended, which it was not legally obliged to do. That claim is dismissed.

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 3 .
Exit inspection photos show that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish.
The tenant did not return the keys.
The landlord had to replace a smoke alarm.
The amounts ordered are proved by invoices paid by the landlord.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

A landlord must prove that damage to the premises occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. If this is established, to avoid liability, the tenant must prove they did not carelessly or intentionally cause or permit the 2 S.45(1)(e) RTA 3 S.40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) RTA damage. Tenants are liable for the actions of people at the premises with their permission 4 .
Where the damage is caused carelessly, and is covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to the lesser of the insurance excess or four weeks' rent 5 .
Tenants are liable for the cost of repairing damage that is intentional or which results from any activity at the premises that is an imprisonable offence. This applies to anything the tenant does and anything done by a person they are responsible for 6 .
Exit inspection photographs provided by the landlord show that during the tenancy: a. a glass pane in a door was broken; b. there were holes in some walls and both the drawers and sink in the bathroom vanity were damaged, requiring it to be replaced.
The cost of the repair work is proved by the invoices provided.
The owners tried to bring a claim under their insurance but the insurer assessed the damage as resulting from multiple events, with a $1,000.00 excess applicable to each.
The only single claim item higher than that excess is for replacement of the vanity. Because the evidence shows the damage to the vanity (removal and breaking of drawers, cigarette burns on the sink) is more likely than to have been intentional, the tenant’s liability to compensate for its replacement is not limited by s.49B(3)(a).
The landlord’s evidence satisfies me that replacement of the vanity was “like for like” with no betterment value that needs to be allowed for. Bailiff’s Fee
The landlord seeks recovery of the $267.00 fee paid to the bailiff on eviction.
It is a cost flowing from the tenant's breach of her obligation to quit the premises on termination so is recoverable. However it is a cost that is automatically included by the District Court’s process when the landlord seeks to enforce an 4 S.40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA. 5 S.49B(3)(a) RTA. 6 S 49B(1) RTA. order through the District Court. It is not awarded to avoid potential duplication of the cost.
Because the landlord has substantially succeeded with its claims, I reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5507170 — Property damage

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5507170 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions