What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5230711?

The tribunal order states: The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,580.00 (5110056-015) immediately

How much money was awarded in case 5230711?

Cleaning: $320.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lightbulbs: $134.96 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Garden Bin: $109.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $678.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5230711?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5230711?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12068557-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5230711?

The tribunal order states: The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,580.00 (5110056-015) immediately

How much money was awarded in case 5230711?

Cleaning: $320.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Lightbulbs: $134.96 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Garden Bin: $109.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $678.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5230711?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5230711?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12068557-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

8 Frederick Street, Waltham, Christchurch 8011 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5230711 — Cleanliness

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5230711. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Replace furnishings: Garden bin	$109.00	Replace furnishings: Garden bin
Rubbish removal	$678.50	Rubbish removal
Replace light bulbs	$134.96	Replace light bulbs
Cleaning	$320.00	Cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement

Order

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,580.00 (5110056-015) immediately apportioned as follows: Irelands Real Estate Limited As Agent For Smooth Moose Holdings Ltd: $1,269.46 Jim Rabuku and Rosi Rabuku: $310.54
Apportionment of the bond is calculated as shown in table below:

Reasons

The landlord attended the remote hearing. The tenants did not attend. A call to Mr Rabuku’s last known mobile number went to voicemail. A call to Ms Rabuku’s last known mobile number was not answered.
I proceeded in the tenant’s absence.
The tenancy commenced on 5 August 2020.
The tenancy ended on 3 March 2025.
On 9 April 2025, the landlord applied for refund of the bond, seeking compensation for cleaning, rubbish removal and chattels/furnishings missing from the premises. The landlord also sought reimbursement of the filing fee.

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. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986. (a) Cleaning
The landlord provided photos taken on 4 March 2025 which show the property was not left reasonably clean. The photos show debris in the drawers of the kitchen, dirt in the base of the dishwasher, dirty floors and an unclean bathroom.
The landlord provided an invoice dated 6 April 2025 for $640 and sought reimbursement of the full amount. The landlord says the parties had previously participated in a mediation in November 2024 in which cleanliness was discussed, and the tenant was reminded of their obligations to keep the property reasonably clean and tidy. 1
Even so, a tenant is not required to leave a property in an immaculate standard of cleanliness. The standard required is what an average, reasonable bystander would consider “reasonably clean” and “reasonably tidy”.
I am satisfied the tenant did not leave the premises “reasonably clean” and “reasonably tidy,” however, a professional cleaner is likely to bring a property to a standard that is higher than “reasonably clean” and “reasonably tidy.” 1 Application number 5033929.
Therefore, I am not satisfied the tenant is liable for the full cost of a professional clean. I consider an appropriate amount of compensation to be half that charged by a professional cleaner.
An order is made accordingly. (b) Carpet cleaning
The landlord says the tenant stained the carpet in the lounge and some of the bedrooms. During the hearing, from the photographs taken on 4 March 2025, the landlord was unable to identify which rooms were depicted. The landlord identified one photograph of the lounge (with fireplace) and submitted it showed a yellow stain on the left-hand side of the photo.
Tenants are not required to steam-clean, or professionally clean, carpets. The tenant’s obligation is to leave the premises in a “reasonably clean” and “reasonably tidy” condition, and that extends to the carpet also. If the landlord claims the tenant damaged the carpet, such that it needed cleaning, they must prove the damage was caused during the tenancy, and is more than fair wear and tear.
Photographs taken on 4 August 2020 show the carpet had some stains, including in the lounge (refer images 188 – 192). Given this, and given the landlord was unable to identify photos taken on 4 March 2025 and which room they showed (other than the lounge), I am not satisfied the landlord has proved additional stains were more likely than not caused by the tenant during the tenancy.
The claim for reimbursement of the cost of carpet cleaning is dismissed. (c) Rubbish removal
The tenant did not remove all rubbish.
The landlord provided photos taken on 4 March 2025 which show rubbish, and other personal items left at the property. The amount of rubbish was extensive and included both inside the premises and around the exterior, including items left in a garden shed.
The landlord provided an invoice dated 6 March 2025 for $678.50 and sought reimbursement of the full amount. The landlord says an email was sent to the tenant on 5 March 2025 requesting they remove all items or agree to the items being disposed of, but the landlord did not receive a response.
I am satisfied the tenant did not remove all rubbish at the end of the tenancy. The amount charged for the removal is reasonable considering the amount of rubbish and personal items left behind.
The amount ordered is proved. (d) Chattel: green garden bin
The landlord says a green-lidded garden bin provided with the premises at the start of the tenancy was not present at the end of the tenancy.
The landlord provided photos taken on 4 August 2020 which show a green- lidded garden bin present the day prior to the tenancy commencing.
The landlord provided photos taken on 4 March 2025 which show a red-lidded rubbish bin present at the end of the tenancy. The landlord says the green- lidded garden bin was missing.
The landlord provided an invoice dated 13 May 2025 for $109.00 for the cost of purchasing a replacement garden bin.
I am satisfied a green-lidded garden bin was provided at the start of the tenancy and was missing at the end of the tenancy.
The amount ordered is proved. (e) Light bulbs
The landlord seeks reimbursement of the cost of replacing light bulbs missing at the end of the tenancy.
The landlord provided an invoice dated 7 April 2025 for a total of $553.55 for work carried out in relation to the lights.
Initially, the landlord sought $210.00, being the cost of replacing 11 light bulbs and one security light. At the hearing, the landlord withdrew the claim in respect of the security light, and sought reimbursement of the cost of replacing the 11 lightbulbs only.
The total cost of the 11 lightbulbs only (including GST) is $134.96.
The amount ordered is proved. Should the tenant reimburse the landlord’s application fee?
As the landlord has succeeded with the claim the tenant must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5230711. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Replace furnishings: Garden bin	$109.00	Replace furnishings: Garden bin
Rubbish removal	$678.50	Rubbish removal
Replace light bulbs	$134.96	Replace light bulbs
Cleaning	$320.00	Cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement

Order

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,580.00 (5110056-015) immediately apportioned as follows: Irelands Real Estate Limited As Agent For Smooth Moose Holdings Ltd: $1,269.46 Jim Rabuku and Rosi Rabuku: $310.54
Apportionment of the bond is calculated as shown in table below:

Reasons

The landlord attended the remote hearing. The tenants did not attend. A call to Mr Rabuku’s last known mobile number went to voicemail. A call to Ms Rabuku’s last known mobile number was not answered.
I proceeded in the tenant’s absence.
The tenancy commenced on 5 August 2020.
The tenancy ended on 3 March 2025.
On 9 April 2025, the landlord applied for refund of the bond, seeking compensation for cleaning, rubbish removal and chattels/furnishings missing from the premises. The landlord also sought reimbursement of the filing fee.

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. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986. (a) Cleaning
The landlord provided photos taken on 4 March 2025 which show the property was not left reasonably clean. The photos show debris in the drawers of the kitchen, dirt in the base of the dishwasher, dirty floors and an unclean bathroom.
The landlord provided an invoice dated 6 April 2025 for $640 and sought reimbursement of the full amount. The landlord says the parties had previously participated in a mediation in November 2024 in which cleanliness was discussed, and the tenant was reminded of their obligations to keep the property reasonably clean and tidy. 1
Even so, a tenant is not required to leave a property in an immaculate standard of cleanliness. The standard required is what an average, reasonable bystander would consider “reasonably clean” and “reasonably tidy”.
I am satisfied the tenant did not leave the premises “reasonably clean” and “reasonably tidy,” however, a professional cleaner is likely to bring a property to a standard that is higher than “reasonably clean” and “reasonably tidy.” 1 Application number 5033929.
Therefore, I am not satisfied the tenant is liable for the full cost of a professional clean. I consider an appropriate amount of compensation to be half that charged by a professional cleaner.
An order is made accordingly. (b) Carpet cleaning
The landlord says the tenant stained the carpet in the lounge and some of the bedrooms. During the hearing, from the photographs taken on 4 March 2025, the landlord was unable to identify which rooms were depicted. The landlord identified one photograph of the lounge (with fireplace) and submitted it showed a yellow stain on the left-hand side of the photo.
Tenants are not required to steam-clean, or professionally clean, carpets. The tenant’s obligation is to leave the premises in a “reasonably clean” and “reasonably tidy” condition, and that extends to the carpet also. If the landlord claims the tenant damaged the carpet, such that it needed cleaning, they must prove the damage was caused during the tenancy, and is more than fair wear and tear.
Photographs taken on 4 August 2020 show the carpet had some stains, including in the lounge (refer images 188 – 192). Given this, and given the landlord was unable to identify photos taken on 4 March 2025 and which room they showed (other than the lounge), I am not satisfied the landlord has proved additional stains were more likely than not caused by the tenant during the tenancy.
The claim for reimbursement of the cost of carpet cleaning is dismissed. (c) Rubbish removal
The tenant did not remove all rubbish.
The landlord provided photos taken on 4 March 2025 which show rubbish, and other personal items left at the property. The amount of rubbish was extensive and included both inside the premises and around the exterior, including items left in a garden shed.
The landlord provided an invoice dated 6 March 2025 for $678.50 and sought reimbursement of the full amount. The landlord says an email was sent to the tenant on 5 March 2025 requesting they remove all items or agree to the items being disposed of, but the landlord did not receive a response.
I am satisfied the tenant did not remove all rubbish at the end of the tenancy. The amount charged for the removal is reasonable considering the amount of rubbish and personal items left behind.
The amount ordered is proved. (d) Chattel: green garden bin
The landlord says a green-lidded garden bin provided with the premises at the start of the tenancy was not present at the end of the tenancy.
The landlord provided photos taken on 4 August 2020 which show a green- lidded garden bin present the day prior to the tenancy commencing.
The landlord provided photos taken on 4 March 2025 which show a red-lidded rubbish bin present at the end of the tenancy. The landlord says the green- lidded garden bin was missing.
The landlord provided an invoice dated 13 May 2025 for $109.00 for the cost of purchasing a replacement garden bin.
I am satisfied a green-lidded garden bin was provided at the start of the tenancy and was missing at the end of the tenancy.
The amount ordered is proved. (e) Light bulbs
The landlord seeks reimbursement of the cost of replacing light bulbs missing at the end of the tenancy.
The landlord provided an invoice dated 7 April 2025 for a total of $553.55 for work carried out in relation to the lights.
Initially, the landlord sought $210.00, being the cost of replacing 11 light bulbs and one security light. At the hearing, the landlord withdrew the claim in respect of the security light, and sought reimbursement of the cost of replacing the 11 lightbulbs only.
The total cost of the 11 lightbulbs only (including GST) is $134.96.
The amount ordered is proved. Should the tenant reimburse the landlord’s application fee?
As the landlord has succeeded with the claim the tenant must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5230711 — Cleanliness at 8 Frederick Street, Waltham, Christchurch 8011

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5230711 — Cleanliness at 8 Frederick Street, Waltham, Christchurch 8011

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions