What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5213654?

The tribunal order states: Losehina Havili and Vaivelata Kamoto must pay New Age Rentals Limited As

How much money was awarded in case 5213654?

Cleaning: $555.45 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,100.00 awarded to landlord; Replace 2x Toilet Cistern: $632.50 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $230.00 awarded to landlord; Wallpaper & Painting (Depreciated: $1,325.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5213654?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5213654?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11999309-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5213654?

The tribunal order states: Losehina Havili and Vaivelata Kamoto must pay New Age Rentals Limited As

How much money was awarded in case 5213654?

Cleaning: $555.45 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,100.00 awarded to landlord; Replace 2x Toilet Cistern: $632.50 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $230.00 awarded to landlord; Wallpaper & Painting (Depreciated: $1,325.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5213654?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5213654?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11999309-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

4 Stellata Court, Randwick Park, Auckland 2105 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5213654 — Property damage

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5213654 — net $3,869.95 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rubbish removal	$230.00	Rubbish removal
Cleaning	$555.45	Cleaning
Replace 2x toilet cistern	$632.50	Replace 2x toilet cistern
Carpet replacement (depreciated	$1,100.00	Carpet replacement (depreciated
Wallpaper & painting (depreciated	$1,325.00	Wallpaper & painting (depreciated
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,869.95
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,869.95

The hearing was held by video conference. The agent for the landlord attended. Ms Havili attended for the tenants.

The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Did the tenants meet their end-of-tenancy obligations, and are they liable for damage to the property?

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”).

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.

The tenancy commenced on 11 October 2022 and ended on 6 January 2025.

The landlord’s claims relate to rubbish removal ($230), carpet replacement ($2,200), wallpaper removal and painting ($5,300), replacement of two toilet cisterns ($632.50), and cleaning ($555.45). The landlord submitted invoices and an outgoing inspection report supported by photographs.

The evidence shows rubbish left behind and that the premises had not been returned in a clean and tidy condition. I am satisfied the landlord has proven for cleaning and rubbish removal, and I award the amounts claimed in full.

The landlord also claims the cost of replacing two toilet cisterns. One was missing its lid, and the other was not functioning properly. The tenant acknowledged removing the lid of one due to a button issue and forgetting to replace it. She also alleged repeated issues with both toilets and said she had informed the property manager. However, the landlord has no record of any complaints. In the absence of supporting evidence from the tenant, and given that both cisterns required replacement shortly after the tenancy ended, I find the tenants liable for this cost.

The photographs provided show that the carpet was heavily stained and soiled. The tenant claimed the carpet was in a poor condition at the start of the tenancy. The landlord confirmed it was five to six years old. When assessing compensation, the Tribunal must apply the principle of depreciation. This means the landlord should be restored to the position they would have been in had the damage not occurred, but not placed in a better position. Depreciation accounts for the natural decline in the value of an item due to age, use, and condition. In rental properties, carpet typically has a useful life of around ten years. As the carpet had exceeded half its expected lifespan, I award 50% of the amount claimed, being $1,100.

The landlord also claims $5,300 for wallpaper removal, wall repairs, and repainting. The photographs show damage to the walls, including two holes and widespread wear to the wallpaper. The tenant said the walls and wallpaper were already in poor condition at the start of the tenancy. The landlord confirmed they were around five to six years old. The tenant stated that they attempted to patch the holes, however these repairs were not completed to an acceptable standard of workmanship and did not restore the walls to a reasonable condition. The expected lifespan of painting and wallpaper in rental properties is approximately seven years. As the surfaces were about 75% through their useful life, I allow 25% of the amount claimed, which is $1,325.

As the landlord has been largely successful, I also award the filing fee of $27 under section 102(2) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5213654 — net $3,869.95 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rubbish removal	$230.00	Rubbish removal
Cleaning	$555.45	Cleaning
Replace 2x toilet cistern	$632.50	Replace 2x toilet cistern
Carpet replacement (depreciated	$1,100.00	Carpet replacement (depreciated
Wallpaper & painting (depreciated	$1,325.00	Wallpaper & painting (depreciated
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,869.95
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,869.95

Order

Losehina Havili and Vaivelata Kamoto must pay New Age Rentals Limited As Agent For Rajeswaran Jeyaram $3,869.95 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.

Reasons

The hearing was held by video conference. The agent for the landlord attended. Ms Havili attended for the tenants.
The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Did the tenants meet their end-of-tenancy obligations, and are they liable for damage to the property?
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”).
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.
The tenancy commenced on 11 October 2022 and ended on 6 January 2025.
The landlord’s claims relate to rubbish removal ($230), carpet replacement ($2,200), wallpaper removal and painting ($5,300), replacement of two toilet cisterns ($632.50), and cleaning ($555.45). The landlord submitted invoices and an outgoing inspection report supported by photographs.
The evidence shows rubbish left behind and that the premises had not been returned in a clean and tidy condition. I am satisfied the landlord has proven for cleaning and rubbish removal, and I award the amounts claimed in full.
The landlord also claims the cost of replacing two toilet cisterns. One was missing its lid, and the other was not functioning properly. The tenant acknowledged removing the lid of one due to a button issue and forgetting to replace it. She also alleged repeated issues with both toilets and said she had informed the property manager. However, the landlord has no record of any complaints. In the absence of supporting evidence from the tenant, and given that both cisterns required replacement shortly after the tenancy ended, I find the tenants liable for this cost.
The photographs provided show that the carpet was heavily stained and soiled. The tenant claimed the carpet was in a poor condition at the start of the tenancy. The landlord confirmed it was five to six years old. When assessing compensation, the Tribunal must apply the principle of depreciation. This means the landlord should be restored to the position they would have been in had the damage not occurred, but not placed in a better position. Depreciation accounts for the natural decline in the value of an item due to age, use, and condition. In rental properties, carpet typically has a useful life of around ten years. As the carpet had exceeded half its expected lifespan, I award 50% of the amount claimed, being $1,100.
The landlord also claims $5,300 for wallpaper removal, wall repairs, and repainting. The photographs show damage to the walls, including two holes and widespread wear to the wallpaper. The tenant said the walls and wallpaper were already in poor condition at the start of the tenancy. The landlord confirmed they were around five to six years old. The tenant stated that they attempted to patch the holes, however these repairs were not completed to an acceptable standard of workmanship and did not restore the walls to a reasonable condition. The expected lifespan of painting and wallpaper in rental properties is approximately seven years. As the surfaces were about 75% through their useful life, I allow 25% of the amount claimed, which is $1,325.
As the landlord has been largely successful, I also award the filing fee of $27 under section 102(2) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5213654 — Property damage at 4 Stellata Court, Randwick Park, Auckland 2105

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5213654 — Property damage at 4 Stellata Court, Randwick Park, Auckland 2105

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions