Tenantcheck Insights · Case study
Tenancy Tribunal case 5365282 — Property damage at Unit/Flat Flat 4, 6 Ranch Road, Mount Maunganui, Mount
Published 22 January 2026 · Application 5365282
Landlord favoured
- Property damage
- Cleanliness
At a glance
Key facts from the published tribunal order.
Outcome
Landlord favoured
From published order
Location
Mount Maunganui
Tribunal region
Adjudicator
N Bradley
Dispute themes
Award balance
Gross awards, any bond applied per the order, and the remaining balance payable.
- Gross award
- $4,251.48
- Total balance for Tenant to pay Landlord
- $4,251.48
Claims & awards
What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.
| Claim | Landlord | Tenant | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lock/key replacement | $186.00 | Lock/key replacement | |
| Cleaning | $609.50 | Cleaning | |
| Carpet Cleaning | $535.00 | Carpet Cleaning | |
| Repairs: Wall damage | $408.25 | Repairs: Wall damage | |
| Compensation - replace two damaged doors | $1,617.19 | Compensation - replace two damaged doors | |
| Rubbish removal | $867.54 | Rubbish removal | |
| Filing fee reimbursement | $28.00 | Filing fee reimbursement | |
| Net award | $4,251.48 | ||
| Total payable by Tenant to Landlord | $4,251.48 |
Claims and awards for application 5365282 — net $4,251.48 NZD. Verify on MoJ.
Lock/key replacement
- Amount
- $186.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Lock/key replacement
Cleaning
- Amount
- $609.50
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Cleaning
Carpet Cleaning
- Amount
- $535.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Carpet Cleaning
Repairs: Wall damage
- Amount
- $408.25
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Repairs: Wall damage
Compensation - replace two damaged doors
- Amount
- $1,617.19
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Compensation - replace two damaged doors
Rubbish removal
- Amount
- $867.54
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Rubbish removal
Filing fee reimbursement
- Amount
- $28.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Filing fee reimbursement
Net award
Landlord $4,251.48
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord
Landlord $4,251.48
Claim types — money lines allowed on this order
Order
- Caris Bensemann must pay Eves Realty Limited As Agent For Don Graham Trust $4,251.48 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
Reasons
- The landlord attended the hearing by video call.
- The tenant did not connect to the hearing and was telephoned on the phone number provided but the phone call went to voicemail. I am satisfied the tenant was properly served with notice of the hearing. 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 tenancy ended by way of a termination order made by the Tribunal. Relevant legal considerations
- The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
- With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations That includes a requirement that the applicant, establish their claims on the balance of probabilities. The balance of probabilities means more likely than un-likely, 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. The Law – tenant’s obligations at the end of the tenancy
- At the end of the tenancy the tenant must remove all his or her goods from the premises, leave the premises (including the land provided with the premises) reasonably clean and tidy, remove all rubbish, return all keys and security devices and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. 1 Cleaning and rubbish removal:
- There is no scientific way to determine what is ‘reasonably’ clean and tidy, what is required is for the Tribunal to evaluate the evidence available (particularly photographs presented), and then to determine whether the premises would be reasonably clean. The Tribunal will also consider factors such as the length of the tenancy, and the general condition of the premises (for example, surfaces that are new and in a good condition will be easier to clean than older and worn surfaces, particularly with paint work). The Law - Tenants responsibility for damage
- A tenant must not intentionally or carelessly cause damage or permit any other person to damage the premises. 2
- Where a landlord is claiming compensation for damage 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. 1 See section 40(1)(e) of the RTA. 2 See s 40 (2)(a) of the RTA.
- Tenants are liable for the actions of people at the premises with their permission. 3
- Fair wear and tear can be described as damage which might reasonably be expected to naturally occur over time, such as the deterioration or gradual wear occurring with everyday use. 4
- 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). 5
- 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). 6 Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. 7
- 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. 8
- 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. 9
- In assessing a claim for compensation, I must take into account betterment and depreciation. The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached their obligations and should not be better or worse off. In calculating depreciation, I must take into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. THE LANDLORD’S CLAIMS Cleaning, rubbish removal and lock replacement
- The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. General cleaning and carpet cleaning was required. The landlord provided photographs of the property at the end of the tenancy which 3 See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA. 4 See Taylor v Webb [1937] 2KB 283 (CA). 5 See section 49B(3)(a) RTA. 6 See section 49B(3)(b) RTA. 7 See section 49B(3A)(a) RTA. 8 See section 49B(1) RTA. 9 See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541. shows that the tenant left a significant amount of rubbish, and it appears she did not undertake any cleaning when she vacated the premises.
- The tenant did not return the keys.
- The amounts ordered are proved with invoices, oral evidence and photographs of the premises from the end of the tenancy. Damage claims
- The following damage was caused during the tenancy: a. Two doors were damaged during the tenancy. The landlord provided photographs of the two doors that were damaged with holes. The landlord says the tenant asked the landlord to repair or replace the doors and the landlord did so. The tenant said they would pay for the doors but has not. b. There were three holes in the walls at the end of the tenancy (two in the toilet and one in the main bedroom) that had to be patch repaired.
- The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
- The amount ordered is proved with photographs of the damage, oral evidence and invoices. Filing Fee
- Because the landlord has been successful in their claim, I have ordered that the tenant pay the application filing fee. 10 Suppression
- On my enquiry, the landlord did not seek name suppression.
Topics & place
Topics are dispute themes across the order (not the same as claim-type money lines).
Residential Tenancies Act sections
s102, s21, s4, s40, s40(1), s40(2), s49B(1), s49B(3), s49B(3A)
Key findings
- Dispute theme: property damage
- Dispute theme: cleaning
Property management
Frequently asked questions
Common questions about this Tenancy Tribunal case.
What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5365282?
The tribunal order states: Caris Bensemann must pay Eves Realty Limited As Agent For Don Graham
How much money was awarded in case 5365282?
Cleaning: $535.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $609.50 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $186.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,617.19 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $408.25 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $867.54 awarded to landlord
What type of tenancy dispute was case 5365282?
The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness.
Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5365282?
The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13010627-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.