How much money was awarded in case 5512113?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Tribunal Order: $35.86 awarded to landlord; Remediation Costs: $4,318.06 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5512113?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5512113?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13879717-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5512113?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Tribunal Order: $35.86 awarded to landlord; Remediation Costs: $4,318.06 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5512113?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5512113?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13879717-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat Flat 19, 185 Naenae Road, Naenae, Lower Hutt Tenancy Tribunal Case 5512113 — Tenancy dispute

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5512113 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] must pay Oxygen.Co.Nz Limited As Agent For United Group Limited

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5512113 — net $4,381.92 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Remediation costs	$4,318.06	Remediation costs
Previous tribunal order	$35.86	Previous tribunal order
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$4,381.92
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,381.92

[The tenant/s] must pay Oxygen.Co.Nz Limited As Agent For United Group Limited $4,381.92 immediately, calculated as shown in table below. DescriptionLandlord Remediation costs$4,318.06 Previous tribunal order$35.86 Filing fee reimbursement$28.00 Total award$4,381.92 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$4,381.92

Reasons

The Tribunal must consider an application filed by the landlord against the tenant.

Only the landlord appeared at the hearing. I am satisfied that the tenant has been properly notified of the hearing, and therefore I will proceed to consider the claim in his absence.

BACKGROUND

The tenancy commenced on 30 May 2025. The sole tenant is [The tenant/s].

Rent arrears arose, and on 30 April 2026, the Tribunal ordered that the tenancy terminate because the rent arrears were over 21 days. I note the tenant did not attend that hearing either. The Tribunal ordered the tenant pay the rent arrears and filing fee totalling $1,615.86. The bond was released to the landlord in full, meaning the tenant owed the landlord a further $35.86.

Possession was returned to the landlord. When the premises were returned, the landlord found extensive damage and work was required. Compensation for that is the subject of this claim.

LANDLORDS CLAIMS

At the hearing, the applicant confirmed their claims are as follows: a. Compensation for remediation to the premises b. Combining the earlier Tribunal order; and c. The filing fee.

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).

With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations.

That includes a requirement that the party bringing the claim (the applicant), establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. The balance of probabilities means more likely than unlikely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely.

It is the applicant that must prove their case. As noted by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: ... [L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.

ANALYSIS

The tenancy has ended, and the landlord now seeks compensation for remediation costs incurred at the tenancy.

The landlord has provided photographs when the tenancy was returned, which show: a. Paint over much of the floor. b. Extensive graffiti on walls. c. Extensive goods and rubbish. d. Premises that were unclean.

The Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) requires that the landlord provide the premises to the tenant at the start of the tenancy in a reasonable state of cleanliness, and there is an equivalent obligation on the tenant to return the premises: ...in a reasonably clean and reasonably tidy condition, and remove or arrange for the removal from the premises of all rubbish.

With any compensation claim, to receive an order the party must incur a loss. In short, the compensation is intended as best money can do, to compensate for the actual loss incurred.

Where a landlord claims compensation for damage caused by a tenant, the landlord must first prove the damage is more than fair wear and tear, and that it occurred during the tenancy. 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.

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.

Damage is intentional where a person intends to cause damage and takes the necessary steps to achieve that purpose. Damage is also intentional when a person does something, or allows a situation to continue, knowing that damage is a certainty. See the High Court decision of Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.

I find the tenant has not returned the tenancy reasonably clean and tidy, and that the tenant is likely to have intentionally damaged the premises.

Taking into consideration the photographs, the work invoiced is entirely consistent with what would be necessary to remediate the tenancy.

The remediation claim is established and is ordered in full.

I have also combined the earlier Tribunal order, so it is only this order that is to be enforced.

FILING FEE

Because the applicant has been wholly successful in their application, I must award the filing paid to commence the proceeding in the Tribunal.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5512113 — net $4,381.92 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Remediation costs	$4,318.06	Remediation costs
Previous tribunal order	$35.86	Previous tribunal order
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$4,381.92
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$4,381.92

Order

[The tenant/s] must pay Oxygen.Co.Nz Limited As Agent For United Group Limited $4,381.92 immediately, calculated as shown in table below. DescriptionLandlord Remediation costs$4,318.06 Previous tribunal order$35.86 Filing fee reimbursement$28.00 Total award$4,381.92 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$4,381.92

Reasons

The Tribunal must consider an application filed by the landlord against the tenant.
Only the landlord appeared at the hearing. I am satisfied that the tenant has been properly notified of the hearing, and therefore I will proceed to consider the claim in his absence.

BACKGROUND

The tenancy commenced on 30 May 2025. The sole tenant is [The tenant/s].
Rent arrears arose, and on 30 April 2026, the Tribunal ordered that the tenancy terminate because the rent arrears were over 21 days. I note the tenant did not attend that hearing either. The Tribunal ordered the tenant pay the rent arrears and filing fee totalling $1,615.86. The bond was released to the landlord in full, meaning the tenant owed the landlord a further $35.86.
Possession was returned to the landlord. When the premises were returned, the landlord found extensive damage and work was required. Compensation for that is the subject of this claim.

LANDLORDS CLAIMS

At the hearing, the applicant confirmed their claims are as follows: a. Compensation for remediation to the premises b. Combining the earlier Tribunal order; and c. The filing fee.

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations.
That includes a requirement that the party bringing the claim (the applicant), establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. The balance of probabilities means more likely than unlikely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely.
It is the applicant that must prove their case. As noted by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: ... [L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.

ANALYSIS

The tenancy has ended, and the landlord now seeks compensation for remediation costs incurred at the tenancy.
The landlord has provided photographs when the tenancy was returned, which show: a. Paint over much of the floor. b. Extensive graffiti on walls. c. Extensive goods and rubbish. d. Premises that were unclean.
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) requires that the landlord provide the premises to the tenant at the start of the tenancy in a reasonable state of cleanliness, and there is an equivalent obligation on the tenant to return the premises: ...in a reasonably clean and reasonably tidy condition, and remove or arrange for the removal from the premises of all rubbish.
With any compensation claim, to receive an order the party must incur a loss. In short, the compensation is intended as best money can do, to compensate for the actual loss incurred.
Where a landlord claims compensation for damage caused by a tenant, the landlord must first prove the damage is more than fair wear and tear, and that it occurred during the tenancy. 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.
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.
Damage is intentional where a person intends to cause damage and takes the necessary steps to achieve that purpose. Damage is also intentional when a person does something, or allows a situation to continue, knowing that damage is a certainty. See the High Court decision of Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.
I find the tenant has not returned the tenancy reasonably clean and tidy, and that the tenant is likely to have intentionally damaged the premises.
Taking into consideration the photographs, the work invoiced is entirely consistent with what would be necessary to remediate the tenancy.
The remediation claim is established and is ordered in full.
I have also combined the earlier Tribunal order, so it is only this order that is to be enforced.

FILING FEE

Because the applicant has been wholly successful in their application, I must award the filing paid to commence the proceeding in the Tribunal.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5512113 — Tenancy dispute at Unit/Flat Flat 19, 185 Naenae Road, Naenae, Lower Hutt

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5512113 — Tenancy dispute at Unit/Flat Flat 19, 185 Naenae Road, Naenae, Lower Hutt

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

BACKGROUND

LANDLORDS CLAIMS

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

ANALYSIS

FILING FEE

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

BACKGROUND

LANDLORDS CLAIMS

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

ANALYSIS

FILING FEE

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions