What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5284560?

The tribunal order states: Seionala Lamipeti and John Lamipeti must pay Angela Ip and William To

How much money was awarded in case 5284560?

Cleaning: $830.71 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $280.32 awarded to landlord; Rent: $3,605.71 awarded to landlord; Replace Bathroom Vanity: $784.75 awarded to landlord; Replace Carpet: $2,981.72 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings - Security Camer…: $575.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $102.90 awarded to landlord; Tradesperson Call Out Charge: $161.00 awarded to landlord; Walls and Doors: $5,980.00 awarded to landlord; Water To End Of Tenancy: $342.18 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5284560?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5284560?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13054327-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5284560?

The tribunal order states: Seionala Lamipeti and John Lamipeti must pay Angela Ip and William To

How much money was awarded in case 5284560?

Cleaning: $830.71 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $280.32 awarded to landlord; Rent: $3,605.71 awarded to landlord; Replace Bathroom Vanity: $784.75 awarded to landlord; Replace Carpet: $2,981.72 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings - Security Camer…: $575.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $102.90 awarded to landlord; Tradesperson Call Out Charge: $161.00 awarded to landlord; Walls and Doors: $5,980.00 awarded to landlord; Water To End Of Tenancy: $342.18 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5284560?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5284560?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13054327-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

755 Chapel Road, Dannemora, Auckland 2016 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5284560 — Property damage

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5284560 — net $11,351.29 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent to 7 June 2025	$3,605.71	Rent to 7 June 2025
Water to end of tenancy	$342.18	Water to end of tenancy
Rubbish removal - piano	$102.90	Rubbish removal - piano
Replace furnishings - security cameras	$575.00	Replace furnishings - security cameras
Tradesperson call out charge	$161.00	Tradesperson call out charge
Lock/key replacement	$280.32	Lock/key replacement
Cleaning (materials only	$830.71	Cleaning (materials only
Replace carpet	$2,981.72	Replace carpet
Repairs to walls and doors	$5,980.00	Repairs to walls and doors
Replace bathroom vanity	$784.75	Replace bathroom vanity
Filing fee	$27.00	Filing fee
Net award	$11,351.29
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$11,351.29

Order

Seionala Lamipeti and John Lamipeti must pay Angela Ip and William To $11,351.29 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $4,320.00 (5662763-001) to Angela Ip and William To immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 2 October 2025. Only the landlord attended the hearing on 29 January 2026. The landlord was represented at the first hearing by their property manager. I understood the property manager subsequently ceased acting for the landlord.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Background
The parties signed a residential tenancy agreement for a fixed term from 18 October 2023 to 17 October 2024 at a weekly rent of $1,080.00. A bond of $4,320.00 was paid and lodged. A periodic tenancy was then entered into from 4 December 2024 at a weekly rent of $1,180.00. The tenant was allowed to keep a dog and agreed to remedy any damage caused by the dog to the house or grounds.
The tenancy ended on 7 June 2025.
Some of the claims can be determined without detailed comment: • The tenant owed rent arrears of $3,605.71 ($2,720.00 plus $885.71) to the end of the tenancy, as shown on the rent summaries from the two property managers. • The tenant owed water charges of $342.18 to the end of the tenancy, as shown on the water invoices. • A piano was left behind, and this incurred a disposal cost of $102.90. • The landlord’s security cameras had to be reinstalled due to damage to the wiring at a cost of $575.00. • The tenant was liable for the cost of a call out to address an issue with the gas stove. The tenant agreed in the tenancy agreement to pay for reasonable call out charges if the tenant did not adhere to prior arrangements for entry. The invoice from the plumber (for $161.00) stated that he attended at 8am, the tenant did not answer when he knocked and called, although the front door was unlocked. The tenant said the tradesperson did not attend. I find it is more likely that the tenant did not realise he was there. • The tenant did not return the keys and other chattels provided for their benefit, such as a heat pump remote ($190.67) yale contactless key tags ($24.65) and a remote for the garage ($65.00). • The house needed cleaning at the end of the tenancy ($830.71 for materials). • The carpet was damaged by dog urine and had to be replaced. The company which provided the quotation reported a very strong urine smell which they did not think could be cleaned. Photographs taken using an Odorex pet urine stain detector showed that the urine had affected the flooring under the carpet. The quoted cost was $7,454.30 and the carpet was about 7 years old. Adopting a useful economic life of 12 years for the carpet, I discount the quote by 60% for depreciation and award $2,981.72.
In addition to these claims there were issues with water damage and damage caused by the tenant’s dogs. Relevant Law
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.
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.
Where the damage is careless and is not covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to four weeks' rent.
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.
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. Damage to Walls, Bathroom, Kitchen
An Affordable House Inspection reported was provided dated 22 June 2025. This noted that dog urine was still visible throughout the house and recommended deep cleaning. In the bathroom the vanity was “falling apart” and a dog had chewed the bathroom, which had been flooded more than once and there was “significant water damage”. All five bedrooms had holes in the walls and there were “small holes and damage to the walls throughout.” The report noted that the kitchen was in very poor condition and appeared to have flood damage, the cabinets were swollen, the oven was mouldy, and some of the finishing had been chewed by dogs.
The landlord claimed $5,980.00 for repairing holes, fixing the kitchen cupboard where it had been chewed at the bottom, replacing door stoppers, missing door handles and a bedroom door, and removing the garage carpet and painting the concrete floor. I award this amount.
The landlord claimed $1,903.37 for the cost of replacing the vanity in the bathroom. An inspection report dated 17 October 2023 showed water damage to the cabinetry in the ensuite bathroom. The landlord told me that this occurred prior to the tenancy and was not the water damage being claimed, which was in a different bathroom.
The cost of the replacement vanity was $599.00, the taps were $185.75, and plumbing alterations $977.50 to install the new wall-hung vanity. I award the cost of a replacement vanity and the taps, but not the plumbing which appears to relate to the landlord’s decision to install a different style of vanity. This is an award of $784.75.
The landlord claimed $22,085.37 for repairs to the kitchen. A report from the supplier dated 10 June 2025 stated that all the kitchen carcasses were damaged by water leaks and some of the front doors were swollen from moisture and water damage. The benchtop was cracked. They recommended the installation of a new kitchen, noting: “...partial repairs and benchtop fixes are not possible”. The itemisation of costs provided shows that the old kitchen had to be removed and a new one installed, including new flooring.
I summarise the timeline relating to the kitchen leak: • The inspection report on 17 October 2023 showed that a water pipe connection under the sink had been wrapped in tape and cork appeared to have been placed inside. • The inspection report on 20 September 2024 reported: “The kitchen under the sink was leaking and the tenant has fixed the kitchen under the pipe and replaced the wood under the cupboard.” • The inspection report dated 4 March 2025 reported a water leak from the sink: “Found leaking under the kitchen sink, it seems for a period of time the cabinet had damage.” There was also a leak in the ensuite bathroom. The photographs show that a pipe had been removed and a cork stopper inserted. • A plumber attended to a leak under the kitchen sink on 7 May 2025 and found a trap on the right-hand sink leaking badly. The trap was tightened. The plumber also noted that the bench top was rotten and the sink insert was falling through. • The exit inspection report dated 9 June 2025 showed that one of the pipes under the sink had been chewed.
The tenant said the sink was leaking and sometimes they could see water on the floor in the mornings. They told the property manager, but the sink was not properly fixed before they left.
The landlord provided several photographs from the inspection reports together with a commentary. Even with that assistance, I find it difficult to piece together what happened in respect of the leak under the sink, or to understand the precise repairs or changes to the plumbing that were implemented over time as shown in the photographs. It seems that there was a problem at the start of the tenancy, given the photographs in the October 2023 report. The property manager knew of the problem by September 2024, and the tenants had clearly tried to fix the issue. However, it was really the landlord’s obligation to maintain the premises and ensure that the repairs had stopped the leaks. There is no indication in the file that a plumber was sent to assess the situation before May 2025. I also note that this was a house with various other leaks, including in the ensuite and the hot water cylinder.
I find that the tenant did not intentionally or carelessly cause the water damage, and I decline to award compensation for the kitchen (except in relation to the dog damage, discussed above). Even if (contrary to my finding) the tenant was careless, either because they performed inadequate repairs or did not inform the landlord about the damage at an earlier stage, depending on the insurance policy I consider that the landlord might only be entitled to an award of the excess of $550.00 (section 49B(3) of the Act). Curtains
The landlord claimed $926.46 for replacing the curtains with blinds. The landlord said this would be cheaper than cleaning the curtains and provided a quotation from September 2020 for $1,299.50. It would be a bit surprising if the curtains could not be cleaned for less.
The “before and after” photographs provided do not obviously show the curtains in a poor condition or in need of replacement. They may have been ageing and look to be in average condition. I decline to award this cost. Lawns
The landlord claimed $1,127.00 for gardening work. The photographs dated 23 June 2025 do show a need to tidy the gardens. However, the inspection report dated 17 October 2023 also seems to show gardens that would benefit from a certain amount of tidying, indeed, this may reflect the style of the exterior. The tenant indicated that the exterior was overgrown (“like a forest”) which they tidied up. Tenants are not generally required to leave premises in a better condition than they find them. I decline to award gardening costs. Filing Fee
The landlord is awarded the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5284560 — net $11,351.29 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent to 7 June 2025	$3,605.71	Rent to 7 June 2025
Water to end of tenancy	$342.18	Water to end of tenancy
Rubbish removal - piano	$102.90	Rubbish removal - piano
Replace furnishings - security cameras	$575.00	Replace furnishings - security cameras
Tradesperson call out charge	$161.00	Tradesperson call out charge
Lock/key replacement	$280.32	Lock/key replacement
Cleaning (materials only	$830.71	Cleaning (materials only
Replace carpet	$2,981.72	Replace carpet
Repairs to walls and doors	$5,980.00	Repairs to walls and doors
Replace bathroom vanity	$784.75	Replace bathroom vanity
Filing fee	$27.00	Filing fee
Net award	$11,351.29
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$11,351.29

Order

Seionala Lamipeti and John Lamipeti must pay Angela Ip and William To $11,351.29 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $4,320.00 (5662763-001) to Angela Ip and William To immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 2 October 2025. Only the landlord attended the hearing on 29 January 2026. The landlord was represented at the first hearing by their property manager. I understood the property manager subsequently ceased acting for the landlord.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Background
The parties signed a residential tenancy agreement for a fixed term from 18 October 2023 to 17 October 2024 at a weekly rent of $1,080.00. A bond of $4,320.00 was paid and lodged. A periodic tenancy was then entered into from 4 December 2024 at a weekly rent of $1,180.00. The tenant was allowed to keep a dog and agreed to remedy any damage caused by the dog to the house or grounds.
The tenancy ended on 7 June 2025.
Some of the claims can be determined without detailed comment: • The tenant owed rent arrears of $3,605.71 ($2,720.00 plus $885.71) to the end of the tenancy, as shown on the rent summaries from the two property managers. • The tenant owed water charges of $342.18 to the end of the tenancy, as shown on the water invoices. • A piano was left behind, and this incurred a disposal cost of $102.90. • The landlord’s security cameras had to be reinstalled due to damage to the wiring at a cost of $575.00. • The tenant was liable for the cost of a call out to address an issue with the gas stove. The tenant agreed in the tenancy agreement to pay for reasonable call out charges if the tenant did not adhere to prior arrangements for entry. The invoice from the plumber (for $161.00) stated that he attended at 8am, the tenant did not answer when he knocked and called, although the front door was unlocked. The tenant said the tradesperson did not attend. I find it is more likely that the tenant did not realise he was there. • The tenant did not return the keys and other chattels provided for their benefit, such as a heat pump remote ($190.67) yale contactless key tags ($24.65) and a remote for the garage ($65.00). • The house needed cleaning at the end of the tenancy ($830.71 for materials). • The carpet was damaged by dog urine and had to be replaced. The company which provided the quotation reported a very strong urine smell which they did not think could be cleaned. Photographs taken using an Odorex pet urine stain detector showed that the urine had affected the flooring under the carpet. The quoted cost was $7,454.30 and the carpet was about 7 years old. Adopting a useful economic life of 12 years for the carpet, I discount the quote by 60% for depreciation and award $2,981.72.
In addition to these claims there were issues with water damage and damage caused by the tenant’s dogs. Relevant Law
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.
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.
Where the damage is careless and is not covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to four weeks' rent.
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.
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. Damage to Walls, Bathroom, Kitchen
An Affordable House Inspection reported was provided dated 22 June 2025. This noted that dog urine was still visible throughout the house and recommended deep cleaning. In the bathroom the vanity was “falling apart” and a dog had chewed the bathroom, which had been flooded more than once and there was “significant water damage”. All five bedrooms had holes in the walls and there were “small holes and damage to the walls throughout.” The report noted that the kitchen was in very poor condition and appeared to have flood damage, the cabinets were swollen, the oven was mouldy, and some of the finishing had been chewed by dogs.
The landlord claimed $5,980.00 for repairing holes, fixing the kitchen cupboard where it had been chewed at the bottom, replacing door stoppers, missing door handles and a bedroom door, and removing the garage carpet and painting the concrete floor. I award this amount.
The landlord claimed $1,903.37 for the cost of replacing the vanity in the bathroom. An inspection report dated 17 October 2023 showed water damage to the cabinetry in the ensuite bathroom. The landlord told me that this occurred prior to the tenancy and was not the water damage being claimed, which was in a different bathroom.
The cost of the replacement vanity was $599.00, the taps were $185.75, and plumbing alterations $977.50 to install the new wall-hung vanity. I award the cost of a replacement vanity and the taps, but not the plumbing which appears to relate to the landlord’s decision to install a different style of vanity. This is an award of $784.75.
The landlord claimed $22,085.37 for repairs to the kitchen. A report from the supplier dated 10 June 2025 stated that all the kitchen carcasses were damaged by water leaks and some of the front doors were swollen from moisture and water damage. The benchtop was cracked. They recommended the installation of a new kitchen, noting: “...partial repairs and benchtop fixes are not possible”. The itemisation of costs provided shows that the old kitchen had to be removed and a new one installed, including new flooring.
I summarise the timeline relating to the kitchen leak: • The inspection report on 17 October 2023 showed that a water pipe connection under the sink had been wrapped in tape and cork appeared to have been placed inside. • The inspection report on 20 September 2024 reported: “The kitchen under the sink was leaking and the tenant has fixed the kitchen under the pipe and replaced the wood under the cupboard.” • The inspection report dated 4 March 2025 reported a water leak from the sink: “Found leaking under the kitchen sink, it seems for a period of time the cabinet had damage.” There was also a leak in the ensuite bathroom. The photographs show that a pipe had been removed and a cork stopper inserted. • A plumber attended to a leak under the kitchen sink on 7 May 2025 and found a trap on the right-hand sink leaking badly. The trap was tightened. The plumber also noted that the bench top was rotten and the sink insert was falling through. • The exit inspection report dated 9 June 2025 showed that one of the pipes under the sink had been chewed.
The tenant said the sink was leaking and sometimes they could see water on the floor in the mornings. They told the property manager, but the sink was not properly fixed before they left.
The landlord provided several photographs from the inspection reports together with a commentary. Even with that assistance, I find it difficult to piece together what happened in respect of the leak under the sink, or to understand the precise repairs or changes to the plumbing that were implemented over time as shown in the photographs. It seems that there was a problem at the start of the tenancy, given the photographs in the October 2023 report. The property manager knew of the problem by September 2024, and the tenants had clearly tried to fix the issue. However, it was really the landlord’s obligation to maintain the premises and ensure that the repairs had stopped the leaks. There is no indication in the file that a plumber was sent to assess the situation before May 2025. I also note that this was a house with various other leaks, including in the ensuite and the hot water cylinder.
I find that the tenant did not intentionally or carelessly cause the water damage, and I decline to award compensation for the kitchen (except in relation to the dog damage, discussed above). Even if (contrary to my finding) the tenant was careless, either because they performed inadequate repairs or did not inform the landlord about the damage at an earlier stage, depending on the insurance policy I consider that the landlord might only be entitled to an award of the excess of $550.00 (section 49B(3) of the Act). Curtains
The landlord claimed $926.46 for replacing the curtains with blinds. The landlord said this would be cheaper than cleaning the curtains and provided a quotation from September 2020 for $1,299.50. It would be a bit surprising if the curtains could not be cleaned for less.
The “before and after” photographs provided do not obviously show the curtains in a poor condition or in need of replacement. They may have been ageing and look to be in average condition. I decline to award this cost. Lawns
The landlord claimed $1,127.00 for gardening work. The photographs dated 23 June 2025 do show a need to tidy the gardens. However, the inspection report dated 17 October 2023 also seems to show gardens that would benefit from a certain amount of tidying, indeed, this may reflect the style of the exterior. The tenant indicated that the exterior was overgrown (“like a forest”) which they tidied up. Tenants are not generally required to leave premises in a better condition than they find them. I decline to award gardening costs. Filing Fee
The landlord is awarded the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5284560 — Property damage at 755 Chapel Road, Dannemora, Auckland 2016

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5284560 — Property damage at 755 Chapel Road, Dannemora, Auckland 2016

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