What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5226451?

The tribunal order states: Lealyn Carey Taukiri must pay Home Let Property Management Limited As

How much money was awarded in case 5226451?

Cleaning: $1,046.50 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $290.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $236.47 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5226451?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5226451?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12088355-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5226451?

The tribunal order states: Lealyn Carey Taukiri must pay Home Let Property Management Limited As

How much money was awarded in case 5226451?

Cleaning: $1,046.50 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $290.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $236.47 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5226451?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5226451?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12088355-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

134C Tramway Road, Enderley, Hamilton 3214 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5226451 — Cleanliness

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5226451 — net $1,599.97 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning and mowing	$1,046.50	Cleaning and mowing
Lock/key replacement	$290.00	Lock/key replacement
Repairs: plumbing repairs	$236.47	Repairs: plumbing repairs
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,599.97
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,599.97

Mr Rennie, representing the landlord, attended the teleconference hearing. The phone number for the tenant, the last three digits being 884, was called twice, without any response. As the tenant was served, the hearing proceeded in her absence.

The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. The landlord said the tenancy ended around 28 November 2025, despite the tenant finally being evicted on 29 November 2025. During the hearing, the landlord withdrew the claim for the cost of the bailiff in evicting the tenant.

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 landlord said the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. The property manager said the owner has absorbed the cost of rubbish removal and is claiming for cleaning and other costs here.

The landlord provided photographs at the start of the tenancy as well as photographs at the end of the tenancy. The photographs at the start of the tenancy showed a clean and tidy modern, well-presented property. The photographs at the end of the tenancy showed rubbish and clothing and other belongings strewn throughout the property, and left in cupboards, wardrobes, kitchen drawers and cupboards, on tables and elsewhere. The landlord said the cleaners were involved in having to move all the tenant’s belongings into the garage for her to collect from there, which is part of their cost.

The photographs of the condition of the property at the end of the tenancy showed a dirty stove with rat droppings, pantry shelves caked in dirt also with rat droppings, a dirty kitchen bench, dirty vanity and shower in the bathroom, dirty kitchen and other floors, dirty marks on various walls in the house, dishes left in the dishwasher and a pile of clothing and belongings just left in place, that were removed by the cleaners, for them to be able to clean underneath where these items were left.

The landlord said it took 2 cleaners around 7-8 hours each to clean the property at the end of the tenancy and claimed $966, inclusive of GST, for the total cleaning cost. Given the evidence provided of the dirty state of the property at the end of the tenancy, I find this to be a reasonable cleaning cost. Therefore, I award the landlord $966.00 for cleaning at the end of the tenancy.

The landlord said the lawns were overgrown at the end of the tenancy. The photographs of this were taken on 29 November 2024, the day the tenant finally was evicted from the property and show overgrown lawns and weeds. The landlord provided photographs of the lawns at the start of the tenancy, which showed well-mown, neat lawns and garden area. The landlord claimed $80.50 to mow the lawns, which I find to be a reasonable cost. Therefore, I award the landlord $80.50 for mowing the lawns at the end of the tenancy. The cleaning cost and mowing cost awarded, which the landlord claimed together, come to $1,046.50.

The landlord said the tenant did not return the keys. The landlord claimed for the cost of replacing the locks and keys. The landlord claimed $290.00 for replacing the keys and locks. I find this to be a reasonable cost for this and so award the landlord $290.00 for replacing the keys.

The amounts ordered are proved.

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.

The landlord said the following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. The toilet seat was in a bad state and had to be replaced. Photographs were provided of this at the start and end of the tenancy. b. The shower waste part was missing from the bottom of the shower and had to be replaced. Photographs were provided of this. c. The bathroom vanity was blocked with toys and debris and had to be unblocked. This was detailed in the plumber’s invoice. d. There was a very large crack the length of the bathroom vanity, which had to have silicone put into the crack to preserve the vanity. The landlord provided photographs of the vanity at the start and at the end of the tenancy, which showed the tenant caused a very large crack almost the width of the vanity. e. The landlord provided an invoice from a plumber, which included other plumbing jobs done for the landlord, for which the landlord did not claim. The landlord said they apportioned the work done by the plumber for the tenant-related issues out of this invoice, which was discussed in detail at the hearing. The landlord claimed $236.47 for putting silicone in the vanity crack, unblocking the vanity pipe, replacing the shower waste and replacing the toilet seat. I find this to be a reasonable cost, given the evidence of photographs of these at the start and at the end of the tenancy. Therefore, I award the landlord $236.47 for the tenant-related plumbing jobs. f. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The amounts ordered are proved. Filing fee

Because Home Let Property Management Limited As Agent For Carlton Joseph Desa & Marietta Stephanie Desa has been successful with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5226451 — net $1,599.97 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning and mowing	$1,046.50	Cleaning and mowing
Lock/key replacement	$290.00	Lock/key replacement
Repairs: plumbing repairs	$236.47	Repairs: plumbing repairs
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,599.97
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,599.97

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

The amounts ordered are proved.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The amounts ordered are proved. Filing fee

Because Home Let Property Management Limited As Agent For Carlton Joseph Desa & Marietta Stephanie Desa has been successful with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5226451 — Cleanliness at 134C Tramway Road, Enderley, Hamilton 3214

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5226451 — Cleanliness at 134C Tramway Road, Enderley, Hamilton 3214

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