Tenantcheck Insights · Case study
Tenancy Tribunal case 5407670 — Property damage at 66A Chelburn Crescent, Mangere East, Auckland 2024
Published 5 June 2026 · Application 5407670
- Property damage
- Cleanliness
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
- $2,974.01
- Total balance for Tenant to pay Landlord
- $2,974.01
Claims & awards
What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.
| Claim | Landlord | Tenant | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cleaning | $692.75 | Cleaning | |
| Repairs: Hole in dining room | $40.16 | Repairs: Hole in dining room | |
| Cleaning: Kitchen cupboard | $104.26 | Cleaning: Kitchen cupboard | |
| Repairs: Hallway hole | $73.74 | Repairs: Hallway hole | |
| Repairs: Bedroom 1 hole | $40.16 | Repairs: Bedroom 1 hole | |
| Repairs: Bedroom 2 hole | $40.16 | Repairs: Bedroom 1 hole | |
| Rubbish removal: Wood and bamboo post | $89.63 | Rubbish removal: Wood and bamboo post | |
| Repairs: Garage walls | $319.52 | Repairs: Garage walls | |
| Rubbish removal: Bush by window | $358.50 | Rubbish removal: Bush by window | |
| Repairs: Rangehood | $66.13 | Repairs: Rangehood | |
| Repairs: Carpet replacement bedroom 2 | $604.00 | Repairs: Carpet replacement bedroom 2 | |
| Repairs: Carpet replacement lounge | $545.00 | Repairs: Carpet replacement lounge | |
| Net award | $2,974.01 | ||
| Total payable by Tenant to Landlord | $2,974.01 |
Claims and awards for application 5407670 — net $2,974.01 NZD. Verify on MoJ.
Cleaning
- Amount
- $692.75
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Cleaning
Repairs: Hole in dining room
- Amount
- $40.16
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Repairs: Hole in dining room
Cleaning: Kitchen cupboard
- Amount
- $104.26
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Cleaning: Kitchen cupboard
Repairs: Hallway hole
- Amount
- $73.74
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Repairs: Hallway hole
Repairs: Bedroom 1 hole
- Amount
- $40.16
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Repairs: Bedroom 1 hole
Repairs: Bedroom 2 hole
- Amount
- $40.16
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Repairs: Bedroom 1 hole
Rubbish removal: Wood and bamboo post
- Amount
- $89.63
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Rubbish removal: Wood and bamboo post
Repairs: Garage walls
- Amount
- $319.52
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Repairs: Garage walls
Rubbish removal: Bush by window
- Amount
- $358.50
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Rubbish removal: Bush by window
Repairs: Rangehood
- Amount
- $66.13
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Repairs: Rangehood
Repairs: Carpet replacement bedroom 2
- Amount
- $604.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Repairs: Carpet replacement bedroom 2
Repairs: Carpet replacement lounge
- Amount
- $545.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Repairs: Carpet replacement lounge
Net award
Landlord $2,974.01
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord
Landlord $2,974.01
Claim types — money lines allowed on this order
Order
- Epenesa Nansen must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities $2,974.01 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
Reasons
- The Landlord attended the hearing. The Tenant did not appear.
- The landlord has applied for compensation 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 did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. A lot of the interior surfaces required wiping, there was food left in the oven, and the kitchen cupboard and drawers required cleaning. The rubbish included planks, bamboo posts and a bush outside that required removing. An exit inspection report and invoice were provided to substantiate the costs.
- 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: Dining room ceiling hole, large hallway wall hole, bedroom 1 wall hole, bedroom 2 wall hole, garage wall graffiti and wall damage and stained bedroom 2 and lounge carpets. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. Photographs were provided of the holes in the walls and the extensively stained carpet which required replacement. An entry inspection report was provided to show the damage occurred during the tenancy.
- 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.
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: cleaning
- Dispute theme: property damage
Frequently asked questions
Common questions about this Tenancy Tribunal case.
What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5407670?
The tribunal order states: Epenesa Nansen must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities $2,974.01
How much money was awarded in case 5407670?
Cleaning: $692.75 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $104.26 awarded to landlord; Bedroom 1 Hole: $40.16 awarded to landlord; Bedroom 2 Hole: $40.16 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $604.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $545.00 awarded to landlord; Garage Walls: $319.52 awarded to landlord; Hallway Hole: $73.74 awarded to landlord; Hole In Dining Room: $40.16 awarded to landlord; Rangehood: $66.13 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $358.50 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $89.63 awarded to landlord
What type of tenancy dispute was case 5407670?
The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness.
Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5407670?
The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13708219-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.