Tenantcheck Insights · Case study
Tenancy Tribunal case 5404773 — Property damage at Unit/Flat Flat 3, 32 Akehurst Avenue, New Lynn, Auckland
Published 16 March 2026 · Application 5404773
Landlord favoured
- Property damage
- Rent arrears
At a glance
Key facts from the published tribunal order.
Outcome
Landlord favoured
From published order
Location
Auckland
Tribunal region
Adjudicator
A Aiolupotea
Dispute themes
Award balance
Gross awards, any bond applied per the order, and the remaining balance payable.
- Gross award
- $15,837.10
- Total balance for Tenant to pay Landlord
- $15,837.10
Claims & awards
What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.
| Claim | Landlord | Tenant | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rent arrears | $6,620.00 | 2. The landlord has applied for rent arrears, water rates arrears, compensation, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. | |
| Carpet damage insurance excess x 5 ( each | $3,250.00 | Carpet damage insurance excess x 5 ( each | |
| Painting wall repair insurance excess x5 ( each | $3,250.00 | Painting wall repair insurance excess x5 ( each | |
| Repairs: Wall damage | $1,315.03 | Repairs: Wall damage | |
| Rubbish removal | $494.00 | Rubbish removal | |
| Disposal belongings | $527.00 | Disposal belongings | |
| Water rates | $353.07 | Water rates | |
| Filing fee reimbursement | $28.00 | Filing fee reimbursement | |
| Net award | $15,837.10 | ||
| Total payable by Tenant to Landlord | $15,837.10 |
Claims and awards for application 5404773 — net $15,837.10 NZD. Verify on MoJ.
Rent arrears
- Amount
- $6,620.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- 2. The landlord has applied for rent arrears, water rates arrears, compensation, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
Carpet damage insurance excess x 5 ( each
- Amount
- $3,250.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Carpet damage insurance excess x 5 ( each
Painting wall repair insurance excess x5 ( each
- Amount
- $3,250.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Painting wall repair insurance excess x5 ( each
Repairs: Wall damage
- Amount
- $1,315.03
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Repairs: Wall damage
Rubbish removal
- Amount
- $494.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Rubbish removal
Disposal belongings
- Amount
- $527.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Disposal belongings
Water rates
- Amount
- $353.07
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Water rates
Filing fee reimbursement
- Amount
- $28.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Filing fee reimbursement
Net award
Landlord $15,837.10
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord
Landlord $15,837.10
Claim types — money lines allowed on this order
Order
- Napalu Tialata must pay Iron Bridge Property Management (Auck) Limited Iron Bridge Property Management $15,837.10 immediately, being rent arrears to 7 July 2025.
Reasons
- The Landlord attended the hearing. The Tenant did not appear.
- The landlord has applied for rent arrears, water rates arrears, compensation, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
How much is owed for rent and water rates arrears?
- The tenancy ended on 7 July 2025. The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices 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 Landlord had to also dispose of the Tenants belongings which were saturated with urine. Invoices for the rubbish removal and disposal of belongings were provided as well as photographs of the property.
- 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- carpet and wall damage, floor and deck damage. The carpet at the property had been newly installed in 2021.
- Around May 2025, the landlord noticed an unusual smell within the property, which became significantly stronger by July 2025. Investigation revealed that multiple areas of carpet had been heavily contaminated with urine. The contamination affected the two bedrooms, hallway, lounge/dining area, and entrance hall, requiring removal and replacement of the carpet and underlay.
- Due to the severity of the contamination, some of the skirting boards were removed to allow the affected areas to dry, and the property was ventilated for approximately five days. Urine contamination also caused significant damage to internal walls. Wallpaper in several areas had deteriorated and required removal back to the gib before repainting. As a result, the entire interior of the house required repainting and associated repair work.
- Additional damage occurred to interior walls, flooring, and the exterior deck near the corner bedroom. A contractor reported that repeated urination near the bedroom and conservatory area had caused moisture damage, including a rotted deck post. Repairs included cutting back damaged material, sanding affected areas, and drying the structure. Some contamination had also seeped from the carpet into the lower wall areas.
- Invoices for the repair work and entry and exit inspection reports were provided to substantiate the costs. The damage is more than fair wear and tear and the Tenant has not provided any evidence to dispute this.
- 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.
- As the Landlord has been wholly successful, the Tenant shall reimburse the filing fee.
Topics & place
Topics are dispute themes across the order (not the same as claim-type money lines).
Residential Tenancies Act sections
s40(1), s40(2), s49B, s49B(1), s49B(3), s49B(3A)
Key findings
- Dispute theme: rent arrears
- Dispute theme: property damage
Property management
- IRON BRIDGE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT (AUCK) LIMITED (applicant)
Frequently asked questions
Common questions about this Tenancy Tribunal case.
What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5404773?
The tribunal order states: Napalu Tialata must pay Iron Bridge Property Management (Auck) Limited Iron
How much money was awarded in case 5404773?
Disposal Belongings: $527.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $3,250.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $3,250.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $6,620.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,315.03 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $494.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $353.07 awarded to landlord
What type of tenancy dispute was case 5404773?
The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Rent arrears.
Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5404773?
The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13295421-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.