What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5279380?

The tribunal order states: Kareko Pou, Zia Van niekerk and Joshua Jaftha must pay Max Rentals Nz

How much money was awarded in case 5279380?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $390.85 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $4,832.66 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $380.04 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5279380?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5279380?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12402392-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5279380?

The tribunal order states: Kareko Pou, Zia Van niekerk and Joshua Jaftha must pay Max Rentals Nz

How much money was awarded in case 5279380?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $390.85 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $4,832.66 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $380.04 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5279380?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5279380?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12402392-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

38 Browns Road, Manurewa, Auckland 2102 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5279380 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

38 Browns Road, Manurewa, Auckland 2102 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5279380 — Rent arrears | TenantCheck

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5279380 — net $2,830.55 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 3 June 2025	$4,832.66	Rent arrears to 3 June 2025
Water rates	$380.04	Water rates
Repairs	$390.85	claim for repairs of the damage is proven.
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,830.55
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,830.55

Claims and awards for application 5279380 — net $2,830.55 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears to 3 June 2025

Amount: $4,832.66
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears to 3 June 2025

Water rates

Amount: $380.04
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Water rates

Repairs

Amount: $390.85
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: claim for repairs of the damage is proven.

Filing fee reimbursement

Amount: $27.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Filing fee reimbursement

Net award

Landlord $2,830.55

Total payable by Tenant to Landlord

Landlord $2,830.55

Dismissed claims

Cleaning
The Cost Of Drain Unblocking — __________________________________________________________________________________ 52793803 Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Filing Fee Property damage Rent arrears Water Rates Cleanliness

Order

Kareko Pou, Zia Van niekerk and Joshua Jaftha must pay Max Rentals Nz Limited As Agent For Sanchit Gupta $2,830.55 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,800.00 (6455341-005) to Max Rentals Nz Limited As Agent For Sanchit Gupta immediately.
All remaining claims are dismissed.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing by video. The tenant Joshua Jaftha attended the hearing by video. Attempts were made to join the other two tenants to the hearing by telephone, but the calls were either unanswered or went to voicemail.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, water rates, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

The tenancy ended on 3 June 2025. The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.

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 claimed for cleaning, but the exit inspection report shows that the tenants left the premises reasonably clean and tidy.
The landlord stated that the cleaning was required for the carpet because the tenants had puppies at the premises. The tenant stated that the carpet had been cleaned twice at the end of the tenancy and there were stains on the carpet when they moved in. I note that the cleaning invoice makes no mention of cleaning the carpet or dog smells and instead just states “house cleaning”.
Given the conflicting evidence I am unable to conclude that cleaning was required. The landlord’s claim for cleaning is dismissed.
The landlord claimed for the cost of clearing the drains a month after the tenancy ended. A new tenant had moved in on 12 June 2025 and the drain was cleared on 7 July 2025.
The landlord claims that these tenants are liable for the cost of unblocking the drain because he had arranged for the drains to be unblocked during the tenancy and then they blocked again.
The tenant denies using wet wipes which the invoice states caused the blockage. I expect that the current tenant would also deny using wet wipes.
Given the denial of causing the blockage, the time between the end of the tenancy and the blockage being repaired and the possibility that other factors have contributed to the blockages, including other tenants, I am unable to conclude with certainty that these tenants caused the damage. The landlord’s claim for the cost of drain unblocking is dismissed.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The landlord claimed for damage caused during the tenancy. The damage was a wall hole, damage to a door and a broken toilet seat. The landlord produced the ingoing inspection report and the exit inspection report which shows that the damage was caused during this tenancy.
The landlord’s claim for repairs of the damage is proven.
Because Max Rentals Nz Limited As Agent For Sanchit Gupta has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5279380 — net $2,830.55 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 3 June 2025	$4,832.66	Rent arrears to 3 June 2025
Water rates	$380.04	Water rates
Repairs	$390.85	claim for repairs of the damage is proven.
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,830.55
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,830.55

Claims and awards for application 5279380 — net $2,830.55 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears to 3 June 2025

Amount: $4,832.66
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears to 3 June 2025

Water rates

Amount: $380.04
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Water rates

Repairs

Amount: $390.85
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: claim for repairs of the damage is proven.

Filing fee reimbursement

Amount: $27.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Filing fee reimbursement

Net award

Landlord $2,830.55

Total payable by Tenant to Landlord

Landlord $2,830.55

Dismissed claims

Cleaning
The Cost Of Drain Unblocking — __________________________________________________________________________________ 52793803 Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Filing Fee Property damage Rent arrears Water Rates Cleanliness

Order

Kareko Pou, Zia Van niekerk and Joshua Jaftha must pay Max Rentals Nz Limited As Agent For Sanchit Gupta $2,830.55 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,800.00 (6455341-005) to Max Rentals Nz Limited As Agent For Sanchit Gupta immediately.
All remaining claims are dismissed.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing by video. The tenant Joshua Jaftha attended the hearing by video. Attempts were made to join the other two tenants to the hearing by telephone, but the calls were either unanswered or went to voicemail.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, water rates, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

The tenancy ended on 3 June 2025. The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.

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 claimed for cleaning, but the exit inspection report shows that the tenants left the premises reasonably clean and tidy.
The landlord stated that the cleaning was required for the carpet because the tenants had puppies at the premises. The tenant stated that the carpet had been cleaned twice at the end of the tenancy and there were stains on the carpet when they moved in. I note that the cleaning invoice makes no mention of cleaning the carpet or dog smells and instead just states “house cleaning”.
Given the conflicting evidence I am unable to conclude that cleaning was required. The landlord’s claim for cleaning is dismissed.
The landlord claimed for the cost of clearing the drains a month after the tenancy ended. A new tenant had moved in on 12 June 2025 and the drain was cleared on 7 July 2025.
The landlord claims that these tenants are liable for the cost of unblocking the drain because he had arranged for the drains to be unblocked during the tenancy and then they blocked again.
The tenant denies using wet wipes which the invoice states caused the blockage. I expect that the current tenant would also deny using wet wipes.
Given the denial of causing the blockage, the time between the end of the tenancy and the blockage being repaired and the possibility that other factors have contributed to the blockages, including other tenants, I am unable to conclude with certainty that these tenants caused the damage. The landlord’s claim for the cost of drain unblocking is dismissed.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The landlord claimed for damage caused during the tenancy. The damage was a wall hole, damage to a door and a broken toilet seat. The landlord produced the ingoing inspection report and the exit inspection report which shows that the damage was caused during this tenancy.
The landlord’s claim for repairs of the damage is proven.
Because Max Rentals Nz Limited As Agent For Sanchit Gupta has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5279380 — Rent arrears at 38 Browns Road, Manurewa, Auckland 2102

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5279380 — Rent arrears at 38 Browns Road, Manurewa, Auckland 2102

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

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

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

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