What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5360901?

The tribunal order states: This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 30 October 2025 under

How much money was awarded in case 5360901?

Cleaning: $300.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 5313679 D…: $747.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $144.42 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5360901?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5360901?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13163227-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5360901?

The tribunal order states: This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 30 October 2025 under

How much money was awarded in case 5360901?

Cleaning: $300.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 5313679 D…: $747.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $144.42 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5360901?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5360901?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13163227-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

39A St Lukes Road, Mount Albert, Auckland 1025 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5360901 — Cleanliness

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5360901. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Previous order application 5313679 dated 30 October 2025	$747.00	Previous order application 5313679 dated 30 October 2025
Water rates (to 26 August 2025	$144.42	Water rates (to 26 August 2025
Cleaning	$300.00	Cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement

Order

This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 30 October 2025 under application 5313679.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,219.42 (BN-00057027) to Rent People Limited As Agent For Alvin Pryana immediately. The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,480.58 (BN-00057027) to Lingling Li immediately.

Reasons

On 7 October 2025, the landlord filed a cross application seeking rent arrears, refund of the bond, water rates, cleaning costs and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
At the hearing, the hearing the landlord withdrew their claim for rent arrears, that matter was previously determined by the Tribunal on 30 October 2025 in order 5313679.
The hearing proceeded by way of video conference. Ms Bridgit Phillips, Property Manager, appeared on behalf of the landlord. The tenant appeared supported by her husband Quan Song.
The Tribunal was assisted by Ms Jessica Harborne, a Court appointed Mandarin speaking interpreter. Relevant legal considerations
The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the “Act”).
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations.
That includes a requirement that the party bringing the claim (the applicant), establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities.” The balance of probabilities means more likely than unlikely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely.
This obligation carried by the applicant is referred to as the “burden of proof.” Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
As noted by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: ... [L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.

How much is owed in outstanding water rates?

The landlord seeks water rates until the end of the tenancy totalling $144.42. The landlord provided the water rates bills and calculations for the period claimed.
The landlord told the Tribunal the outstanding water rates had been properly demanded by sending the water rates invoices to the tenant at address for service.
The tenant disputed the amount claimed stating they vacated the property on 30 July 2025 and should only be liable for rent until that date. The tenant further stated the landlord undertook a renovation of the premises following their departure and they should not be liable to any water consumed by the landlord’s contractors during this period.
The landlord stated the property had not been renovated. The landlord also told the Tribunal that the only contractors who had been to the property prior to the new tenants moving in were their cleaning contractors.
Having hearing from the parties and considering all of the evidence the Tribunal finds the tenant liable for water rates to the end of the tenancy and the amount claimed is ordered.

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) of the Act.
The landlord seeks compensation for cleaning totalling $600.00 after paying a contractor to clean the mould off the walls following the end of the tenancy. An invoice in the amount claimed was provided.
The landlord provided pre-tenancy photographs proving the condition of the property at the commencement of the tenancy. The property was provided in a clean and tidy condition free from mould.
The landlord provided photographs taken during and at the end of the tenancy showing significant mould growth on the walls, ceilings, skirting boards, windowsills, and above the heat pump.
The tenant disputes the amount claimed stating there was a leak in the property that contributed to the damp conditions. The tenant said the landlord falsely claimed she was drying her clothes inside the property, failed to adequately ventilate the premises or use the heat pump.
The Tribunal previously determined the tenant’s claims relating to leaks, mould, and dampness in the property, dismissing her claim – see [2025] NZTT 5313679, 5360901.
The Tribunal was able to make a proper before and after comprising of the condition of the property at the beginning and end of the tenancy. Based on the evidence provided the Tribunal is satisfied the tenant’s failed to remove visible mould from the effected areas and on that basis failed to return the property in a reasonably clean and tidy condition. The Tribunal heard that the mould was easily removed and had not penetrated the surfaces. The Tribunal is not satisfied that the amount claimed by the landlord is reasonable in the circumstances and reduces the award to $300.00 and that it what is ordered. Other matters
On 30 October 2025, the Tribunal made an order relating to this tenancy, for rent arrears to 26 August 2025. The previous order is incorporated into this order for enforcement purposes.
Because Rent People Limited As Agent For Alvin Pryana has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.
Despite being substantially successful the landlord did not seek name suppression.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5360901. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Previous order application 5313679 dated 30 October 2025	$747.00	Previous order application 5313679 dated 30 October 2025
Water rates (to 26 August 2025	$144.42	Water rates (to 26 August 2025
Cleaning	$300.00	Cleaning
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement

Order

This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 30 October 2025 under application 5313679.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,219.42 (BN-00057027) to Rent People Limited As Agent For Alvin Pryana immediately. The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,480.58 (BN-00057027) to Lingling Li immediately.

Reasons

On 7 October 2025, the landlord filed a cross application seeking rent arrears, refund of the bond, water rates, cleaning costs and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
At the hearing, the hearing the landlord withdrew their claim for rent arrears, that matter was previously determined by the Tribunal on 30 October 2025 in order 5313679.
The hearing proceeded by way of video conference. Ms Bridgit Phillips, Property Manager, appeared on behalf of the landlord. The tenant appeared supported by her husband Quan Song.
The Tribunal was assisted by Ms Jessica Harborne, a Court appointed Mandarin speaking interpreter. Relevant legal considerations
The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the “Act”).
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations.
That includes a requirement that the party bringing the claim (the applicant), establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities.” The balance of probabilities means more likely than unlikely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely.
This obligation carried by the applicant is referred to as the “burden of proof.” Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
As noted by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: ... [L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.

How much is owed in outstanding water rates?

The landlord seeks water rates until the end of the tenancy totalling $144.42. The landlord provided the water rates bills and calculations for the period claimed.
The landlord told the Tribunal the outstanding water rates had been properly demanded by sending the water rates invoices to the tenant at address for service.
The tenant disputed the amount claimed stating they vacated the property on 30 July 2025 and should only be liable for rent until that date. The tenant further stated the landlord undertook a renovation of the premises following their departure and they should not be liable to any water consumed by the landlord’s contractors during this period.
The landlord stated the property had not been renovated. The landlord also told the Tribunal that the only contractors who had been to the property prior to the new tenants moving in were their cleaning contractors.
Having hearing from the parties and considering all of the evidence the Tribunal finds the tenant liable for water rates to the end of the tenancy and the amount claimed is ordered.

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) of the Act.
The landlord seeks compensation for cleaning totalling $600.00 after paying a contractor to clean the mould off the walls following the end of the tenancy. An invoice in the amount claimed was provided.
The landlord provided pre-tenancy photographs proving the condition of the property at the commencement of the tenancy. The property was provided in a clean and tidy condition free from mould.
The landlord provided photographs taken during and at the end of the tenancy showing significant mould growth on the walls, ceilings, skirting boards, windowsills, and above the heat pump.
The tenant disputes the amount claimed stating there was a leak in the property that contributed to the damp conditions. The tenant said the landlord falsely claimed she was drying her clothes inside the property, failed to adequately ventilate the premises or use the heat pump.
The Tribunal previously determined the tenant’s claims relating to leaks, mould, and dampness in the property, dismissing her claim – see [2025] NZTT 5313679, 5360901.
The Tribunal was able to make a proper before and after comprising of the condition of the property at the beginning and end of the tenancy. Based on the evidence provided the Tribunal is satisfied the tenant’s failed to remove visible mould from the effected areas and on that basis failed to return the property in a reasonably clean and tidy condition. The Tribunal heard that the mould was easily removed and had not penetrated the surfaces. The Tribunal is not satisfied that the amount claimed by the landlord is reasonable in the circumstances and reduces the award to $300.00 and that it what is ordered. Other matters
On 30 October 2025, the Tribunal made an order relating to this tenancy, for rent arrears to 26 August 2025. The previous order is incorporated into this order for enforcement purposes.
Because Rent People Limited As Agent For Alvin Pryana has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.
Despite being substantially successful the landlord did not seek name suppression.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5360901 — Cleanliness at 39A St Lukes Road, Mount Albert, Auckland 1025

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5360901 — Cleanliness at 39A St Lukes Road, Mount Albert, Auckland 1025

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed in outstanding water rates?

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

How much is owed in outstanding water rates?

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