What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5511272 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 5511272?

Cleaning: $388.13 awarded to landlord; Disposal Of Goods & Storage: $1,063.18 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $451.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $977.50 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $3,278.57 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5511272?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5511272?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13843668-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5511272 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 5511272?

Cleaning: $388.13 awarded to landlord; Disposal Of Goods & Storage: $1,063.18 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $451.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $977.50 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $3,278.57 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5511272?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5511272?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13843668-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

196 Kaikorai Valley Road, Bradford, Dunedin 9011 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5511272 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5511272 — net $4,386.38 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears from 22/1/ to 13/3/2026	$3,278.57	Rent arrears from 22/1/ to 13/3/2026
Lock/key replacement	$451.00	Lock/key replacement
Disposal of goods & storage	$1,063.18	Disposal of goods & storage
Cleaning	$388.13	Cleaning
Repairs to walls	$977.50	Repairs to walls
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$4,386.38
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,386.38

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord name and identifying details.
[The tenant/s] must pay [The landlord/s] $4,386.38 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,800.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.
The claim for further compensation of $1,220.75 is dismissed.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing, the owner attended by telephone from Australia.
Although the tenant did not attend the hearing, I am satisfied that he had notice of the hearing because the address for service which Tenancy Services used was the one in the tenancy agreement and which the tenant had used to communicate with the landlord this morning.
On 20/5/2026 the landlord applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The fixed term tenancy originally began on 26/11/2024 and was renewed for a further fixed term on 28/11/2025 at $450.00 rent per week.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 13/3/2026 as a result of an eviction by the bailiff following a Tribunal Order sealed on 21/1/2026.
The landlord sought rent arrears of $4,417.14.
However, because the amount sought included the balance of the arrears in the previous Order, which the landlord has enforced, the Tribunal was unable to award the amount claimed.
Rent has been awarded for the period from 22/1/ to 13/3/2026.
In addition, no award can be made for the Bailiff’s fee of $267.00 because that is a matter of enforcement and not within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal.

Did the tenant comply with his 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. The tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord claimed compensation of $2,856.06 as follows: a. $120.00 for lawnmowing, b. $451.00 for changing the locks, c. $465.75 for removing the tenant’s possessions to the lawn, d. $856.18 for disposing of the tenant’s possessions at the tip, e. $207.00 storage costs for a refrigerator and washing machine, f. $388.13 for cleaning, g. $368.00 for carpet cleaning.
In support of the claim the landlord provided invoices, quotes and entry and exit inspection reports with photographs dated 25/11/2024 and 13/3/2026 respectively.
I am persuaded, just, by the evidence provided by the landlord 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 amounts claimed for changing the locks, disposing and storage of the tenant’s possessions and cleaning are proved.
However, the claim for lawn mowing fails as the exit photographs do not support that the lawn needed mowing at the end of the tenancy and the work was not done until 8/4/2026, several weeks after the tenancy ended.
The claim for removing the tenant’s possession to the lawn also fails because sections 62 and 62A set out the criteria for dealing with abandoned goods and removing them to the front lawn is not one of those criteria.
The claim for carpet cleaning also fails because the invoice and photograph supporting the claim do not satisfy me that the carpet needed cleaning at the end of the tenancy, as they were dated over three months after the tenancy ended and no stain was visible in the exit inspection report photograph.

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 damage. Tenants are liable for the actions of people at the premises with their permission. See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA.
The landlord claimed compensation of $977.50 for repairs to holes in a bedroom door and walls.
In support of the claim the landlord provided an invoice and photographs.
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 (or four weeks' market rent in the case of a tenant paying income- related rent). See section 49B(3)(a) RTA.
Where the damage is careless and is not covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to four weeks' rent (or market rent). See section 49B(3)(b) RTA. Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. See section 49B(3A)(a) RTA.
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. See section 49B(1) RTA.
Damage is intentional where a person intends to cause damage and takes the necessary steps to achieve that purpose. Damage is also intentional where a person does something, or allows a situation to continue, knowing that damage is a certainty. See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.
I am satisfied that damage was caused during the tenancy to the bedroom door and walls.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear.
Although there was no evidence about whether the damage was careless or intentional I have awarded the amount sought because it is less than four weeks rent or the insurance excess of $1,150.00.
As [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have awarded the filing fee.
Suppression is granted to the landlord because the proceedings were largely successful.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5511272 — net $4,386.38 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears from 22/1/ to 13/3/2026	$3,278.57	Rent arrears from 22/1/ to 13/3/2026
Lock/key replacement	$451.00	Lock/key replacement
Disposal of goods & storage	$1,063.18	Disposal of goods & storage
Cleaning	$388.13	Cleaning
Repairs to walls	$977.50	Repairs to walls
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$4,386.38
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,386.38

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord name and identifying details.
[The tenant/s] must pay [The landlord/s] $4,386.38 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,800.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.
The claim for further compensation of $1,220.75 is dismissed.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing, the owner attended by telephone from Australia.
Although the tenant did not attend the hearing, I am satisfied that he had notice of the hearing because the address for service which Tenancy Services used was the one in the tenancy agreement and which the tenant had used to communicate with the landlord this morning.
On 20/5/2026 the landlord applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The fixed term tenancy originally began on 26/11/2024 and was renewed for a further fixed term on 28/11/2025 at $450.00 rent per week.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 13/3/2026 as a result of an eviction by the bailiff following a Tribunal Order sealed on 21/1/2026.
The landlord sought rent arrears of $4,417.14.
However, because the amount sought included the balance of the arrears in the previous Order, which the landlord has enforced, the Tribunal was unable to award the amount claimed.
Rent has been awarded for the period from 22/1/ to 13/3/2026.
In addition, no award can be made for the Bailiff’s fee of $267.00 because that is a matter of enforcement and not within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal.

Did the tenant comply with his 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. The tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord claimed compensation of $2,856.06 as follows: a. $120.00 for lawnmowing, b. $451.00 for changing the locks, c. $465.75 for removing the tenant’s possessions to the lawn, d. $856.18 for disposing of the tenant’s possessions at the tip, e. $207.00 storage costs for a refrigerator and washing machine, f. $388.13 for cleaning, g. $368.00 for carpet cleaning.
In support of the claim the landlord provided invoices, quotes and entry and exit inspection reports with photographs dated 25/11/2024 and 13/3/2026 respectively.
I am persuaded, just, by the evidence provided by the landlord 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 amounts claimed for changing the locks, disposing and storage of the tenant’s possessions and cleaning are proved.
However, the claim for lawn mowing fails as the exit photographs do not support that the lawn needed mowing at the end of the tenancy and the work was not done until 8/4/2026, several weeks after the tenancy ended.
The claim for removing the tenant’s possession to the lawn also fails because sections 62 and 62A set out the criteria for dealing with abandoned goods and removing them to the front lawn is not one of those criteria.
The claim for carpet cleaning also fails because the invoice and photograph supporting the claim do not satisfy me that the carpet needed cleaning at the end of the tenancy, as they were dated over three months after the tenancy ended and no stain was visible in the exit inspection report photograph.

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 damage. Tenants are liable for the actions of people at the premises with their permission. See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA.
The landlord claimed compensation of $977.50 for repairs to holes in a bedroom door and walls.
In support of the claim the landlord provided an invoice and photographs.
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 (or four weeks' market rent in the case of a tenant paying income- related rent). See section 49B(3)(a) RTA.
Where the damage is careless and is not covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to four weeks' rent (or market rent). See section 49B(3)(b) RTA. Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. See section 49B(3A)(a) RTA.
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. See section 49B(1) RTA.
Damage is intentional where a person intends to cause damage and takes the necessary steps to achieve that purpose. Damage is also intentional where a person does something, or allows a situation to continue, knowing that damage is a certainty. See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.
I am satisfied that damage was caused during the tenancy to the bedroom door and walls.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear.
Although there was no evidence about whether the damage was careless or intentional I have awarded the amount sought because it is less than four weeks rent or the insurance excess of $1,150.00.
As [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have awarded the filing fee.
Suppression is granted to the landlord because the proceedings were largely successful.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5511272 — Rent arrears at 196 Kaikorai Valley Road, Bradford, Dunedin 9011

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5511272 — Rent arrears at 196 Kaikorai Valley Road, Bradford, Dunedin 9011

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Did the tenant comply with his 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 his 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