What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5380441?

The tribunal order states: Joseph Simeon must pay Watson Real Estate Limited As Agent For Little Morty

How much money was awarded in case 5380441?

Cleaning: $890.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 5334580 D…: $4,000.86 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $429.60 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $515.20 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,996.75 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5380441?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5380441?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12954057-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5380441?

The tribunal order states: Joseph Simeon must pay Watson Real Estate Limited As Agent For Little Morty

How much money was awarded in case 5380441?

Cleaning: $890.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 5334580 D…: $4,000.86 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $429.60 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $515.20 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,996.75 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5380441?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5380441?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12954057-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

27 McCorkindale Street, Feilding, Feilding 4702 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5380441 — Property damage

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5380441 — net $7,860.41 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Previous order application 5334580 dated 31/10/2025	$4,000.86	Previous order application 5334580 dated 31/10/2025
Cleaning: including carpet cleaning	$890.00	Cleaning: including carpet cleaning
Repairs: Holes in wall, painting, damaged blind, net curtains and replacement gate	$1,996.75	Repairs: Holes in wall, painting, damaged blind, net curtains and replacement gate
Lock/key replacement	$429.60	Lock/key replacement
Window repairs	$515.20	Window repairs
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$7,860.41
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$7,860.41

The applicant attended today’s phone hearing. The tenant was contacted through Corrections, as he is a serving prisoner. However, he appears to have changed prisons since the application was filed. I am satisfied that the tenant was given notice of today’s hearing and could have made arrangements to attend the hearing but has not done so, I therefore have proceeded in his absence.

On the 31 October 2025 the tenancy was terminated by the Tribunal and an order for rent arrears and reimbursement of the filing fee was made. The landlord has received the bond, but no other payments under that order. The amount owing is $4000.86 under that order and that amount is incorporated in this order for enforcement purposes.

The landlord has applied for compensation for cleaning, window repairs, repairs for wall damage, painting, repairs to a broken venetian blind, ripped net curtain, gates that have been removed, locks that needed to be changed, and reimbursement of the filing fee following 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 tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.

The tenant’s family removed his belongings from the property soon after the Tribunal terminated his tenancy. On the 3 November the landlord went to the property to secure it and found the tenant’s belongings had been removed. No cleaning of the property had been done.

The landlord provided with photographs of the property taken at the inspection, those photographs show that the property was not left in a reasonably clean and tidy condition and a small amount of rubbish was left in the property.

There was some staining on the carpet and I am satisfied that it was necessary to clean the carpets to bring them back to a reasonable condition.

The tenant did not return the keys.

The landlord had to replace light bulbs.

The amounts ordered are proved.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

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. See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA.

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). See section 49B(3)(a) RTA.

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). See section 49B(3)(b) RTA. Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. See section 49B(3A)(a) RTA.

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. See section 49B(1) RTA.

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. See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.

The following damage was caused during the tenancy: • 2 cracked windows (backdoor and dining room) • 1 broken window – porch • Holes in walls throughout the property (some had been patched) • Broken venetian blind • Ripped net curtain • Outside galvanised gates missing.

The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The amounts ordered are proved.

I have taken 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 have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.

Because Watson Real Estate Limited As Agent For Little Morty Trust Hay & Petheram has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5380441 — net $7,860.41 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Previous order application 5334580 dated 31/10/2025	$4,000.86	Previous order application 5334580 dated 31/10/2025
Cleaning: including carpet cleaning	$890.00	Cleaning: including carpet cleaning
Repairs: Holes in wall, painting, damaged blind, net curtains and replacement gate	$1,996.75	Repairs: Holes in wall, painting, damaged blind, net curtains and replacement gate
Lock/key replacement	$429.60	Lock/key replacement
Window repairs	$515.20	Window repairs
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$7,860.41
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$7,860.41

Order

Joseph Simeon must pay Watson Real Estate Limited As Agent For Little Morty Trust Hay & Petheram $7,860.41 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 31 October 2025 under application TT 5334580.

Reasons

The applicant attended today’s phone hearing. The tenant was contacted through Corrections, as he is a serving prisoner. However, he appears to have changed prisons since the application was filed. I am satisfied that the tenant was given notice of today’s hearing and could have made arrangements to attend the hearing but has not done so, I therefore have proceeded in his absence.
On the 31 October 2025 the tenancy was terminated by the Tribunal and an order for rent arrears and reimbursement of the filing fee was made. The landlord has received the bond, but no other payments under that order. The amount owing is $4000.86 under that order and that amount is incorporated in this order for enforcement purposes.
The landlord has applied for compensation for cleaning, window repairs, repairs for wall damage, painting, repairs to a broken venetian blind, ripped net curtain, gates that have been removed, locks that needed to be changed, and reimbursement of the filing fee following 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 tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The tenant’s family removed his belongings from the property soon after the Tribunal terminated his tenancy. On the 3 November the landlord went to the property to secure it and found the tenant’s belongings had been removed. No cleaning of the property had been done.
The landlord provided with photographs of the property taken at the inspection, those photographs show that the property was not left in a reasonably clean and tidy condition and a small amount of rubbish was left in the property.
There was some staining on the carpet and I am satisfied that it was necessary to clean the carpets to bring them back to a reasonable condition.
The tenant did not return the keys.
The landlord had to replace light bulbs.
The amounts ordered are proved.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

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. See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA.
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). See section 49B(3)(a) RTA.
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). See section 49B(3)(b) RTA. Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. See section 49B(3A)(a) RTA.
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. See section 49B(1) RTA.
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. See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.
The following damage was caused during the tenancy: • 2 cracked windows (backdoor and dining room) • 1 broken window – porch • Holes in walls throughout the property (some had been patched) • Broken venetian blind • Ripped net curtain • Outside galvanised gates missing.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved.
I have taken 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 have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.
Because Watson Real Estate Limited As Agent For Little Morty Trust Hay & Petheram has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5380441 — Property damage at 27 McCorkindale Street, Feilding, Feilding 4702

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5380441 — Property damage at 27 McCorkindale Street, Feilding, Feilding 4702

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Order

Reasons

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