Published tribunal order
Tenancy Tribunal case 5214322 — Property damage at 7A Dawson Road, Otara, Auckland 2023
Decided 21 Jul 2025 · Published 21 Jul 2025 · Application 5214322
Landlord favoured
- Property damage
- Cleanliness
Order
- Telesia Moleni must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities $706.18 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
Reasons
- The landlord attended the hearing represented by Ms Rea.
- The tenant did not attend and did not answer the calls made to her phone during the hearing. She had been notified of the hearing by email and text, accordingly pursuant to section 92 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) the hearing continued in her absence.
- The landlord has applied for compensation following the end of the tenancy. Various claims were withdrawn at the hearing therefore the ordered amounts differ from the amount claimed. I discuss each claim separately below.
- I also note that Ms Moleni has been making regular payments to this debt which have been accounted for in the total left owing. Kāinga Ora agrees for her to continue to make her regular payments to pay the remainder of the debt.
Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?
- Kāinga Ora claims compensation for having to clean the kitchen and remove rubbish (including an old boat) after Ms Moleni vacated the tenancy. The claims have been reduced from the actual cost.
- At the end of a tenancy a 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) RTA.
- The claims have been proven in evidence; accordingly they are approved.
Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?
- Kāinga Ora claims compensation for having to replace the bathroom door which was severely damaged and patch repair three holes in the wall.
- I am satisfied that the evidence has established that the damage to the premises occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. The damage is extensive and given its nature, I find it more likely than not was inflicted intentionally. Accordingly, Ms Moleni is liable for the repair costs. See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA.