What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5517389 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] tenant/s] and Eva [The tenant/s] tenant/s] must pay Utrust Property

How much money was awarded in case 5517389?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Missing Garage Remote: $138.00 awarded to landlord; Missing Glass Recycling Bin: $20.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $633.86 awarded to landlord; Dining Room Doors: $345.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $92.00 awarded to landlord; Kitchen Floor Tiles: $437.00 awarded to landlord; Kitchen Sink Overflow: $60.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $180.15 awarded to landlord; walls patch and paint, internal and…: $2,204.17 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5517389?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5517389?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/14164864-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5517389 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] tenant/s] and Eva [The tenant/s] tenant/s] must pay Utrust Property

How much money was awarded in case 5517389?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Missing Garage Remote: $138.00 awarded to landlord; Missing Glass Recycling Bin: $20.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $100.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $633.86 awarded to landlord; Dining Room Doors: $345.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $92.00 awarded to landlord; Kitchen Floor Tiles: $437.00 awarded to landlord; Kitchen Sink Overflow: $60.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $180.15 awarded to landlord; walls patch and paint, internal and…: $2,204.17 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5517389?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5517389?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/14164864-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

8 Gallery Grove, Flagstaff, Hamilton 3210 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5517389 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

8 Gallery Grove, Flagstaff, Hamilton 3210 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5517389 — Property damage | TenantCheck

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5517389 — net $718.18 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 11 May 2026	$633.86	Rent arrears to 11 May 2026
Lock/key replacement	$100.00	Lock/key replacement
Missing garage remote	$138.00	Missing garage remote
Missing glass recycling bin	$20.00	Missing glass recycling bin
Repairs: kitchen sink overflow	$60.00	Repairs: kitchen sink overflow
Repairs: Fence repair	$92.00	Repairs: Fence repair
Repairs: kitchen floor tiles	$437.00	Repairs: kitchen floor tiles
Repairs: Dining Room doors	$345.00	Repairs: Dining Room doors
Repairs: walls patch and paint, internal and external	$2,204.17	Repairs: walls patch and paint, internal and external
Repairs: Toilet bowl replacement	$180.15	Repairs: Toilet bowl replacement
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$718.18
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$718.18

Claims and awards for application 5517389 — net $718.18 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears to 11 May 2026

Amount: $633.86
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears to 11 May 2026

Lock/key replacement

Amount: $100.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lock/key replacement

Missing garage remote

Amount: $138.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Missing garage remote

Missing glass recycling bin

Amount: $20.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Missing glass recycling bin

Repairs: kitchen sink overflow

Amount: $60.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: kitchen sink overflow

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Filing Fee Property damage Rent arrears

Order

This order corrects and replaces my order dated 3 September 2026

[The tenant/s] tenant/s] and Eva [The tenant/s] tenant/s] must pay Utrust Property Management Limited As The Agent For Shiwen Ma $718.18 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,520.00 (BN-17296576) to Utrust Property Management Limited As The Agent For Shiwen Ma immediately.

Reasons

In typing my order dated 3 September 2026 I made an error in that the amounts ordered to be paid for the lock/key replacement and the repairs to the walls are not consistent with the amounts set out in the reasons section of my order, and the totals of the amount ordered was incorrect. The amounts recorded in the Reasons section are correct. Apart from this error the awards and the reasons section remain the same as in the previous order as set out below. Mrs Liang representing the landlord attended the hearing, which was held as an in- person hearing.

The tenants did not attend the hearing. I am satisfied that the notice of hearing and claim details were served on the tenants via the emails that they have provided on the tenancy agreement as an address for service.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 11 May 2026. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.

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. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
The tenant did not return the key to the garage side door or the garage remote. The amount claimed for the garage remote is proven. The landlord is entitled to compensation for the tenants’ failure to return the garage key, however the landlord has not provided an invoice or similar document that establishes the amount paid to the contractor who rekeyed the lock. The landlord has only provided the invoice the property manager has sent the tenant. For that reason I award nominal damages of $100.00.
The following glass recycling Council bin was missing at the end of the tenancy. The amount ordered was proven.

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.
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.
The following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. the overflow covers in both kitchen sinks were missing; b. the fence required to be repaired in 2 places. The tenants told the property manager during an inspection that the damage had occurred as a result of playing football in the back yard; c. 2 kitchen floor tiles were damaged; d. The louvre doors in the dining/entry area had been removed and were damaged e. One of the toilet bowls had a black/dark stain in the bowl which could not be removed; f.The internal walls and an exterior fence panel were damaged and required repainting.
In relation to the toilet bowl, the landlord claims $600.50 for replacement of the toilet (not including the cistern or seat). I have taken into account betterment and depreciation. The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached their obligations, and should not be better or worse off. In calculating depreciation I have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.
I consider the toilet bowl to be around 36 years old, and to have a reasonable life span of 50 years. The toilet bowl had water marks before the tenancy started, but apart from that the toilet functioned well. I am satisfied the stain in the bottom of the bowl was caused during the tenancy and means that the toilet bowl needed to be replaced and that the landlord had made reasonable attempts to remove the stain without success. I am satisfied the toilet bowl is around 70% through its expected life span and find the tenant is to pay 30% of the cost of replacement, being $180.15.
In relation to the wall damage: I find a substantial number of walls in rooms throughout the premises have been damaged during the tenancy. Damage that has occurred to multiple walls in the 5 bedrooms, the dining room, the lounge, the family room, the hallway and the garage The damage caused includes stains, small holes, dents, chips, holes from nails and from darts, and marks including drawings/lines. In the dining room there is two holes that have been plastered but not to a reasonable tradesman like finish.
An outside fence panel has also been damaged during the tenancy and required plastering, sanding and repainting.
The damage is substantial and required repairs, sanding and plastering and painting of the affected walls.
The evidence establishes that the landlord has paid $2,875.00 + gst ($3,306.25) to have the affected walls repaired and painted. I find this is a reasonable cost for the work required.
In considering betterment and depreciation I am satisfied that the walls were last painted at least 5 years before the end of the tenancy, and that painted walls in tenancy premises have a reasonable life expectancy of around 10 years. Taking into account the repairs that were needed before the walls could be re-painted, I find that the it is reasonable to depreciate the cost of the work by 33%, and that the tenants are liable to pay $2,204.17.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered for all of the damage set out above is proven.
Reimbursement of the filing fee: As the landlord has been successful in its claim the filing fee is awarded.

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5517389 — net $718.18 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 11 May 2026	$633.86	Rent arrears to 11 May 2026
Lock/key replacement	$100.00	Lock/key replacement
Missing garage remote	$138.00	Missing garage remote
Missing glass recycling bin	$20.00	Missing glass recycling bin
Repairs: kitchen sink overflow	$60.00	Repairs: kitchen sink overflow
Repairs: Fence repair	$92.00	Repairs: Fence repair
Repairs: kitchen floor tiles	$437.00	Repairs: kitchen floor tiles
Repairs: Dining Room doors	$345.00	Repairs: Dining Room doors
Repairs: walls patch and paint, internal and external	$2,204.17	Repairs: walls patch and paint, internal and external
Repairs: Toilet bowl replacement	$180.15	Repairs: Toilet bowl replacement
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$718.18
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$718.18

Claims and awards for application 5517389 — net $718.18 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears to 11 May 2026

Amount: $633.86
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears to 11 May 2026

Lock/key replacement

Amount: $100.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Lock/key replacement

Missing garage remote

Amount: $138.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Missing garage remote

Missing glass recycling bin

Amount: $20.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Missing glass recycling bin

Repairs: kitchen sink overflow

Amount: $60.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: kitchen sink overflow

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Filing Fee Property damage Rent arrears

Order

This order corrects and replaces my order dated 3 September 2026

[The tenant/s] tenant/s] and Eva [The tenant/s] tenant/s] must pay Utrust Property Management Limited As The Agent For Shiwen Ma $718.18 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,520.00 (BN-17296576) to Utrust Property Management Limited As The Agent For Shiwen Ma immediately.

Reasons

The tenants did not attend the hearing. I am satisfied that the notice of hearing and claim details were served on the tenants via the emails that they have provided on the tenancy agreement as an address for service.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 11 May 2026. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.

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. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
The tenant did not return the key to the garage side door or the garage remote. The amount claimed for the garage remote is proven. The landlord is entitled to compensation for the tenants’ failure to return the garage key, however the landlord has not provided an invoice or similar document that establishes the amount paid to the contractor who rekeyed the lock. The landlord has only provided the invoice the property manager has sent the tenant. For that reason I award nominal damages of $100.00.
The following glass recycling Council bin was missing at the end of the tenancy. The amount ordered was proven.

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.
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.
The following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. the overflow covers in both kitchen sinks were missing; b. the fence required to be repaired in 2 places. The tenants told the property manager during an inspection that the damage had occurred as a result of playing football in the back yard; c. 2 kitchen floor tiles were damaged; d. The louvre doors in the dining/entry area had been removed and were damaged e. One of the toilet bowls had a black/dark stain in the bowl which could not be removed; f.The internal walls and an exterior fence panel were damaged and required repainting.
In relation to the toilet bowl, the landlord claims $600.50 for replacement of the toilet (not including the cistern or seat). I have taken into account betterment and depreciation. The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached their obligations, and should not be better or worse off. In calculating depreciation I have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.
I consider the toilet bowl to be around 36 years old, and to have a reasonable life span of 50 years. The toilet bowl had water marks before the tenancy started, but apart from that the toilet functioned well. I am satisfied the stain in the bottom of the bowl was caused during the tenancy and means that the toilet bowl needed to be replaced and that the landlord had made reasonable attempts to remove the stain without success. I am satisfied the toilet bowl is around 70% through its expected life span and find the tenant is to pay 30% of the cost of replacement, being $180.15.
In relation to the wall damage: I find a substantial number of walls in rooms throughout the premises have been damaged during the tenancy. Damage that has occurred to multiple walls in the 5 bedrooms, the dining room, the lounge, the family room, the hallway and the garage The damage caused includes stains, small holes, dents, chips, holes from nails and from darts, and marks including drawings/lines. In the dining room there is two holes that have been plastered but not to a reasonable tradesman like finish.
An outside fence panel has also been damaged during the tenancy and required plastering, sanding and repainting.
The damage is substantial and required repairs, sanding and plastering and painting of the affected walls.
The evidence establishes that the landlord has paid $2,875.00 + gst ($3,306.25) to have the affected walls repaired and painted. I find this is a reasonable cost for the work required.
In considering betterment and depreciation I am satisfied that the walls were last painted at least 5 years before the end of the tenancy, and that painted walls in tenancy premises have a reasonable life expectancy of around 10 years. Taking into account the repairs that were needed before the walls could be re-painted, I find that the it is reasonable to depreciate the cost of the work by 33%, and that the tenants are liable to pay $2,204.17.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered for all of the damage set out above is proven.
Reimbursement of the filing fee: As the landlord has been successful in its claim the filing fee is awarded.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5517389 — Property damage at 8 Gallery Grove, Flagstaff, Hamilton 3210

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5517389 — Property damage at 8 Gallery Grove, Flagstaff, Hamilton 3210

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.