What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5210471?

The tribunal order states: Jordan Matthew Snell must pay My Property Manager Limited - As Agent For

How much money was awarded in case 5210471?

Cleaning: $315.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $300.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $464.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,067.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5210471?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5210471?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12079448-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5210471?

The tribunal order states: Jordan Matthew Snell must pay My Property Manager Limited - As Agent For

How much money was awarded in case 5210471?

Cleaning: $315.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $300.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $464.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,067.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5210471?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5210471?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12079448-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

17 Sandown Crescent, Aranui, Christchurch 8061 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5210471 — Property damage

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5210471 — net $1,078.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rubbish removal, dumping and gardening (reduced	$1,067.00	Rubbish removal, dumping and gardening (reduced
Repairs: Wall repairs	$464.00	Repairs: Wall repairs
Oven replacement (depreciated	$300.00	Oven replacement (depreciated
Cleaning	$315.00	Cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,078.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,078.00

Both parties attended the hearing via remote teleconference.

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

The tenancy started on 1 July 2020 and ended on 1 March 2025. The tenant resided at the premises with his then partner. The landlord also advised that there were two dogs at the premises.

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. The tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.

The landlord claims that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.

The landlord provided entry inspection photographs dated 30 June 2020. The Tribunal was also provided with an exit inspection report dated 3 March 2025. The evidence clearly confirms that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy at the end of the tenancy. The evidence also confirmed rubbish and other items left behind in the garage by the tenant.

The landlord provided an invoice from Lawns and More with a claim relating to ‘tenant gardening’ for the amount of $480.00 plus GST. I have carefully compared the entry and exit photographs provided by the landlord. I allow the claim but reduce the amount awarded by 50% for gardening based on the overall condition of the property at the start of the tenancy. The portion of the invoice claimed for gardening is not supported by the evidence.

Accordingly, the claim for rubbish removal, gardening and cleaning is allowed as amended above. Carpet cleaning

The landlord claims that the tenant did not leave the carpet in a reasonably clean condition at the end of the tenancy. Based on the exit photographic evidence the carpet appears to be in a satisfactory condition for the age of the carpet. The landlord advised during the hearing that the carpet has been there since 2018.

The claim for carpet cleaning is not supported by the evidence provided and therefore the claim is dismissed.

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 careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.

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. Wall damage

The landlord claims that the tenant caused damage to various walls in the house. Photographic evidence was provided in support of this claim. Having sighted the evidence provided I am satisfied that the tenant is responsible for this damage.

The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The claim for damage to walls is proven. Oven replacement

The landlord claims that the tenant damaged the oven. The oven was new in 2018 and the landlord says that a type of plastic was melted inside of the oven which could not be removed. This caused a strong smell when the oven was turned on. Attempts to clean the oven were unsuccessful which resulted in the item having to be replaced.

The landlord provided an invoice from Noel Leeming dated 4 April 2025. The photographic evidence clearly confirms damage to the inside of the oven which was unable to be removed. The landlord claims $1133.27.

The tenant says that he had not used the oven in quite some time.

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. The IRD depreciation schedule records a useful lifespan of 8 years for rental property ovens.

Having regard to the age of the oven (7 years) I allow the claim and award a reduced amount of $300.00 for the replacement oven and associated costs.

Because My Property Manager Limited - As Agent For Johe Ltd has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5210471 — net $1,078.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rubbish removal, dumping and gardening (reduced	$1,067.00	Rubbish removal, dumping and gardening (reduced
Repairs: Wall repairs	$464.00	Repairs: Wall repairs
Oven replacement (depreciated	$300.00	Oven replacement (depreciated
Cleaning	$315.00	Cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,078.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,078.00

Both parties attended the hearing via remote teleconference.

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

The tenancy started on 1 July 2020 and ended on 1 March 2025. The tenant resided at the premises with his then partner. The landlord also advised that there were two dogs at the premises.

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

The landlord claims that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.

Accordingly, the claim for rubbish removal, gardening and cleaning is allowed as amended above. Carpet cleaning

The claim for carpet cleaning is not supported by the evidence provided and therefore the claim is dismissed.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The claim for damage to walls is proven. Oven replacement

The tenant says that he had not used the oven in quite some time.

Having regard to the age of the oven (7 years) I allow the claim and award a reduced amount of $300.00 for the replacement oven and associated costs.

Because My Property Manager Limited - As Agent For Johe Ltd has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5210471 — Property damage at 17 Sandown Crescent, Aranui, Christchurch 8061

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5210471 — Property damage at 17 Sandown Crescent, Aranui, Christchurch 8061

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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