What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5400528?

The tribunal order states: Sabrina Hemara must pay Erika Ramirez Tunjo and Simon Eggers $3,039.48

How much money was awarded in case 5400528?

Cleaning: $618.25 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Relet Costs: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,220.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $839.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $908.67 awarded to landlord; Replace Door Lock And Handle: $195.06 awarded to landlord; Replace Two Lost Key Cards And Secur…: $150.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5400528?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage, Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5400528?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13383432-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5400528?

The tribunal order states: Sabrina Hemara must pay Erika Ramirez Tunjo and Simon Eggers $3,039.48

How much money was awarded in case 5400528?

Cleaning: $618.25 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Relet Costs: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,220.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $839.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $908.67 awarded to landlord; Replace Door Lock And Handle: $195.06 awarded to landlord; Replace Two Lost Key Cards And Secur…: $150.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5400528?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage, Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5400528?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13383432-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 230A, 8 Lakewood Court, Manukau, Auckland Tenancy Tribunal Case 5400528 — Rent arrears

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5400528 — net $3,039.48 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$2,220.00	Rent arrears
Repairs: Replace door lock and handle	$195.06	Repairs: Replace door lock and handle
Repairs: Repair front door frame	$839.50	Repairs: Repair front door frame
Cleaning	$618.25	Cleaning
Repairs: Repairs and paint- walls, ceilings, door frame and doors	$908.67	Repairs: Repairs and paint- walls, ceilings, door frame and doors
Replace two lost key cards and security fob	$150.00	Replace two lost key cards and security fob
Relet costs	$500.00	Relet costs
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,039.48
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,039.48

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not.

I am satisfied that the tenant had received proper notice of the hearing time, date and place and chose not to attend.

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

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 23 November 2025. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at 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 did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.

The tenant did not return the key cards or security fob.

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 careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.

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:

The front door lock mechanism, handle and door frame was damage when friends of the tenant’s kicked the door in to gain entry to the premise that they confirmed they were paying $400.00 a week to the tenant to sublet without landlord consent. This damage was intentional and the persons that did the damage were at the property with the tenant’s consent;

There were scratches over the walls, doors and ceilings throughout the premise that required repairs and repainting. Some of this damage appears intentional and some due to the careless acts or omissions of the tenant or persons that at the property with the tenant’s consent.

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

The amounts ordered are proved.

I have considered 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 considered the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Reimbursement of filing fee

Section 102(4) of the RTA confirms that applicants that are wholly or substantially successful in proving their claims will have their filing fee reimbursed. Because Erika Ramirez Tunjo, Simon Eggers have wholly succeeded with the claim, I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5400528 — net $3,039.48 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$2,220.00	Rent arrears
Repairs: Replace door lock and handle	$195.06	Repairs: Replace door lock and handle
Repairs: Repair front door frame	$839.50	Repairs: Repair front door frame
Cleaning	$618.25	Cleaning
Repairs: Repairs and paint- walls, ceilings, door frame and doors	$908.67	Repairs: Repairs and paint- walls, ceilings, door frame and doors
Replace two lost key cards and security fob	$150.00	Replace two lost key cards and security fob
Relet costs	$500.00	Relet costs
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,039.48
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,039.48

Order

Sabrina Hemara must pay Erika Ramirez Tunjo and Simon Eggers $3,039.48 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,420.00 (BN-10000859) to Erika Ramirez Tunjo and Simon Eggers immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not.
I am satisfied that the tenant had received proper notice of the hearing time, date and place and chose not to attend.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy ended on 23 November 2025. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at 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 did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
The tenant did not return the key cards or security fob.
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 careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.
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:
The front door lock mechanism, handle and door frame was damage when friends of the tenant’s kicked the door in to gain entry to the premise that they confirmed they were paying $400.00 a week to the tenant to sublet without landlord consent. This damage was intentional and the persons that did the damage were at the property with the tenant’s consent;
There were scratches over the walls, doors and ceilings throughout the premise that required repairs and repainting. Some of this damage appears intentional and some due to the careless acts or omissions of the tenant or persons that at the property with the tenant’s consent.
The damage is more than fair wear and tear. The tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The amounts ordered are proved.
I have considered 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 considered the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Reimbursement of filing fee
Section 102(4) of the RTA confirms that applicants that are wholly or substantially successful in proving their claims will have their filing fee reimbursed. Because Erika Ramirez Tunjo, Simon Eggers have wholly succeeded with the claim, I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5400528 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 230A, 8 Lakewood Court, Manukau, Auckland

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5400528 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 230A, 8 Lakewood Court, Manukau, Auckland

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?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

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?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions