Published tribunal order
Tenancy Tribunal case 4950215 — Cleanliness at 12A Kakariki Avenue, Mount Eden, Auckland 1024
Decided 24 Mar 2025 · Published 24 Mar 2025 · Application 4950215
Landlord favoured
- Cleanliness
- Property damage
Order
- Yu-ling Bartlett-Wright must pay Bin (Ellen) Chen $1,390.86 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
- The claim for house cleaning ($761.50) is dismissed.
Reasons
- This matter was heard on 26 February 2025 by teleconference. Both parties attended.
- The landlord had filed a claim for unpaid water rates and compensation following the end of the tenancy. Some claims were resolved by agreement at an earlier case conference on 16 October 2024, while others remained in dispute. Claims Agreed by Consent
- At the 16 October 2024 case conference, the tenant agreed to pay the following amounts: • Water rates: $52.36 • Carpet fix: $150.00 • Gate remote controller replacement: $115.00 • New key cut: $15.00 • Rubbish removal: $464.00
- At the hearing, the tenant also agreed to the following further claims: • Lawn mowing: $50.00 • Cabinet door repair: $172.50
- These amounts are therefore awarded by consent. Legal Framework
- Under Section 40(1)(e)(ii) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, tenants are required at the end of the tenancy to leave the premises “reasonably clean and reasonably tidy.” This obligation does not extend to commercial-grade or professional cleaning unless required to remedy damage or neglect beyond fair wear and tear.
- Section 40(2)(a) further provides that tenants must not intentionally or carelessly damage, or permit any other person to damage, the premises.
- The onus is on the landlord to prove any breach and to justify any claim for compensation, usually by way of invoices, reports, and where appropriate, photographs or other corroborating evidence. Disputed Claims House Cleaning – $761.50
- The landlord seeks $761.50 for full internal house cleaning. An invoice and two emails from the professional cleaners were provided. The report described in detail the extent of cleaning, including mould, spider webs, oily walls, and heavy dust. The cleaners described the house as being in a poor state and not suitable for living. The cleaning allegedly took 8.83 hours. However, the landlord did not provide photographs showing the condition of the premises at the end of the tenancy.
- The tenant disputed the claims, stating they cleaned the property before vacating and that they did not use the downstairs bathroom, nor the dishwasher or microwave. They challenged the reliability of the cleaning reports from the professional cleaners in the absence of corroborating visual evidence.
- While the cleaners’ descriptions were detailed and credible, the standard required under Section 40(1)(e)(ii) RTA is “reasonably clean and tidy”—not a commercial or forensic level of cleanliness. Without photographs or a property inspection report to confirm the poor condition alleged, there is insufficient independent evidence to support that the tenant breached her obligations.
- The claim for $761.50 for house cleaning is dismissed. The landlord has not met the evidentiary threshold to prove the property was left in a condition that required this level of professional intervention, or that it exceeded the tenant’s legal obligations under the Act. Carpet Cleaning – $345.00
- The landlord claims $345.00 for professional carpet cleaning due to pet odour. An invoice was submitted.
- The tenant admitted having two dogs at the premises but stated they were house-trained and did not urinate or defecate indoors.
- Having pets on the premises does not automatically require the tenant to have carpets professionally cleaned unless there is evidence of damage or residual odour. However, it is common practice, and often reasonable, for landlords to require carpets to be cleaned at the end of a tenancy involving pets to restore the premises to a reasonably clean and neutral state for incoming tenants.
- Even though there is no evidence of stains or waste, the landlord’s evidence of odour combined with the acknowledged presence of pets is sufficient to justify the cleaning cost. The invoice supports the amount claimed and appears reasonable.
- The claim for $345.00 for carpet cleaning is allowed. Filing fee
- As the landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim, I have ordered the tenant to reimburse the filing fee.