What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5367601?

The tribunal order states: Keri Juanita Raiha Waikato Creed and Teokotairemel Kata must pay Ktw Limited

How much money was awarded in case 5367601?

A Typographical Error In The Calcaul…: $440.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $800.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $3,500.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $937.27 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5367601?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5367601?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13064105-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5367601?

The tribunal order states: Keri Juanita Raiha Waikato Creed and Teokotairemel Kata must pay Ktw Limited

How much money was awarded in case 5367601?

A Typographical Error In The Calcaul…: $440.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $800.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $3,500.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $937.27 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5367601?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5367601?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13064105-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

186 Ohaupo Road, Glenview, Hamilton 3206 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5367601 — Rent arrears

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5367601 — net $2,905.27 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 30 October 2025	$3,500.00	Rent arrears to 30 October 2025
Cleaning	$800.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$937.27	Rubbish removal
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
a typographical error in the calcaultion _______________________________________________________________________________	$440.00	a typographical error in the calcaultion _______________________________________________________________________________
Net award	$2,905.27
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,905.27

Only the landlord attended the hearing.

The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Burden of proof

I begin by noting that the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations as to the burden of proof. That means that it is for the party bringing the application to establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. They must establish that what they are claiming is more probable than not.

Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and reports and photographs can be an important part of discharging this burden. Ultimately it is for the party making the application to decide what evidence to put before the Tribunal and to make submissions accordingly.

As noted in Kaipo v Clarke, in practical terms this means that: 2 ...[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.

It is therefore not for the Tribunal to work out the applicant’s case and go looking for the relevant evidence amongst the material filed by the applicant; it is for the applicant to present their case and advance any relevant submissions.

How much is owed for rent?

The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy as ordered above. 2 Kaipo v Clarke DC Waitakere TT 233/02, 12 April 2002, at [7].

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.

“Reasonably” clean means clean to the standard an average, reasonable bystander would consider reasonable. 3

The tenant's obligation is not an absolute standard, and it does not mean that the premises will be immaculate, spotless, or commercially clean. It also does not mean that the premises will necessarily be ready for occupation by a new tenant, the owner or ready for sale. It is to be expected that a landlord will spend some time (or pay someone else) on cleaning and maintenance work between tenancies. This is part of the business of being a landlord.

The test as to whether premises are in a reasonably clean and tidy condition is an objective test, not to be determined based on the subjective opinion of either the landlord or the tenant.

In Ace Property Management v Owens 4 , the District Court said: A tenant’s obligation pursuant to the Act to leave a property in a “reasonably clean and reasonable tidy condition” does not mean that it will necessarily be up to a standard that a landlord may consider for a new tenant. It is a mistake for landlords to confuse those two matters.

The landlord is claiming $1100 for cleaning. I am satisfied that some cleaning was required to return the property to a reasonably clean and tidy condition but not to that extent. I find that the tenants should pay $800 as a contribution to the cleaning of the premises.

The landlord claimed $960.25 for the cost of rubbish removal. The relevant invoice for rubbish removal was only for $937.25. I therefore only allow the amount claimed on the invoice. I am satisfied the tenant left behind various unwanted belongings and rubbish. 3 Housing New Zealand v Holloway TT Auckland TT215/93, 8 February 1993 4 DC Wellington, CIV 2008-085-14441, 17 December 2008

The landlord is claiming $200 for what it says is a broken Led light. The landlord referred to a photo of an LED light where the protector seems to have been removed.

I am not satisfied that this was other than wear and tear and I do not allow it.

The tenant did not return the keys. I have ordered above that the landlord be reimbursed for their replacement cost.

Because Ktw Limited T/A Propertyscouts Hamilton has succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5367601 — net $2,905.27 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 30 October 2025	$3,500.00	Rent arrears to 30 October 2025
Cleaning	$800.00	Cleaning
Rubbish removal	$937.27	Rubbish removal
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
a typographical error in the calcaultion _______________________________________________________________________________	$440.00	a typographical error in the calcaultion _______________________________________________________________________________
Net award	$2,905.27
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,905.27

Order

Keri Juanita Raiha Waikato Creed and Teokotairemel Kata must pay Ktw Limited T/A Propertyscouts Hamilton $2,905.27 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,800.00 (BN-00149654) to Ktw Limited T/A Propertyscouts Hamilton immediately.

Reasons

Only the landlord attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Burden of proof
I begin by noting that the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations as to the burden of proof. That means that it is for the party bringing the application to establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. They must establish that what they are claiming is more probable than not.
Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and reports and photographs can be an important part of discharging this burden. Ultimately it is for the party making the application to decide what evidence to put before the Tribunal and to make submissions accordingly.
As noted in Kaipo v Clarke, in practical terms this means that: 2 ...[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.
It is therefore not for the Tribunal to work out the applicant’s case and go looking for the relevant evidence amongst the material filed by the applicant; it is for the applicant to present their case and advance any relevant submissions.

How much is owed for rent?

The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy as ordered above. 2 Kaipo v Clarke DC Waitakere TT 233/02, 12 April 2002, at [7].

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.
“Reasonably” clean means clean to the standard an average, reasonable bystander would consider reasonable. 3
The tenant's obligation is not an absolute standard, and it does not mean that the premises will be immaculate, spotless, or commercially clean. It also does not mean that the premises will necessarily be ready for occupation by a new tenant, the owner or ready for sale. It is to be expected that a landlord will spend some time (or pay someone else) on cleaning and maintenance work between tenancies. This is part of the business of being a landlord.
The test as to whether premises are in a reasonably clean and tidy condition is an objective test, not to be determined based on the subjective opinion of either the landlord or the tenant.
In Ace Property Management v Owens 4 , the District Court said: A tenant’s obligation pursuant to the Act to leave a property in a “reasonably clean and reasonable tidy condition” does not mean that it will necessarily be up to a standard that a landlord may consider for a new tenant. It is a mistake for landlords to confuse those two matters.
The landlord is claiming $1100 for cleaning. I am satisfied that some cleaning was required to return the property to a reasonably clean and tidy condition but not to that extent. I find that the tenants should pay $800 as a contribution to the cleaning of the premises.
The landlord claimed $960.25 for the cost of rubbish removal. The relevant invoice for rubbish removal was only for $937.25. I therefore only allow the amount claimed on the invoice. I am satisfied the tenant left behind various unwanted belongings and rubbish. 3 Housing New Zealand v Holloway TT Auckland TT215/93, 8 February 1993 4 DC Wellington, CIV 2008-085-14441, 17 December 2008
The landlord is claiming $200 for what it says is a broken Led light. The landlord referred to a photo of an LED light where the protector seems to have been removed.
I am not satisfied that this was other than wear and tear and I do not allow it.
The tenant did not return the keys. I have ordered above that the landlord be reimbursed for their replacement cost.
Because Ktw Limited T/A Propertyscouts Hamilton has succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5367601 — Rent arrears at 186 Ohaupo Road, Glenview, Hamilton 3206

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5367601 — Rent arrears at 186 Ohaupo Road, Glenview, Hamilton 3206

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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