Tenantcheck Insights · Case study
Tenancy Tribunal case 5408449 — Property damage at 41 Awatapu Drive, Whakatane, Whakatane 3120
Decided 2 April 2026 · Published 2 April 2026 · Application 5408449
Landlord favoured
- Property damage
- Cleanliness
At a glance
Key facts from the published tribunal order.
Outcome
Landlord favoured
From published order
Location
Whakatane
Tribunal region
Adjudicator
N Bradley
Dispute themes
Award balance
Gross awards, any bond applied per the order, and the remaining balance payable.
- Gross award
- $3,976.84
- Bond payment as ordered
- −$2,360.00
- Total balance for Tenant to pay Landlord
- $1,616.84
Claims & awards
What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.
| Claim | Landlord | Tenant | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Water rates to end of tenancy | $483.74 | Water rates to end of tenancy | |
| Cleaning | $350.00 | Cleaning | |
| Lawns and Garden work | $407.50 | Lawns and Garden work | |
| Rubbish removal: skip bin | $341.50 | Rubbish removal: skip bin | |
| Cleaning: exterior | $38.80 | Cleaning: exterior | |
| Replace heatpump remote | $49.00 | Replace heatpump remote | |
| Replace garage door remote | $200.00 | Replace garage door remote | |
| Window repairs | $1,194.39 | Window repairs | |
| Repairs: Door damage | $883.91 | Repairs: Door damage | |
| Filing fee reimbursement | $28.00 | Filing fee reimbursement | |
| Net award | $1,616.84 | ||
| Total payable by Tenant to Landlord | $1,616.84 |
Claims and awards for application 5408449 — net $1,616.84 NZD. Verify on MoJ.
Water rates to end of tenancy
- Amount
- $483.74
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Water rates to end of tenancy
Cleaning
- Amount
- $350.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Cleaning
Lawns and Garden work
- Amount
- $407.50
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Lawns and Garden work
Rubbish removal: skip bin
- Amount
- $341.50
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Rubbish removal: skip bin
Cleaning: exterior
- Amount
- $38.80
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Cleaning: exterior
Replace heatpump remote
- Amount
- $49.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Replace heatpump remote
Replace garage door remote
- Amount
- $200.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Replace garage door remote
Window repairs
- Amount
- $1,194.39
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Window repairs
Repairs: Door damage
- Amount
- $883.91
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Repairs: Door damage
Filing fee reimbursement
- Amount
- $28.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Filing fee reimbursement
Net award
Landlord $1,616.84
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord
Landlord $1,616.84
Dismissed claims
- The Curtain Is Unproven And It — I also note depreciation of at least 50% would have applied in any event. Bond
Claim types — money lines allowed on this order
Order
- Donna Marie Rapana must pay Eves Realty Group Limited As Agent For Susan French $1,616.84 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
- The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,360.00 (3055672-006) to Eves Realty Group Limited As Agent For Susan French immediately.
- The balance of the claim is dismissed.
Reasons
- The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not attend the hearing, despite being served by email. The hearing proceeded in her absence.
- The landlord has applied for water rates, compensation, payment of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Relevant legal considerations
- The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
- With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations. That includes a requirement that the applicant establish their claims on the balance of probabilities. The balance of probabilities means more likely than un-likely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely. This obligation carried by the applicant is referred to as the “burden of proof”. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
How much is owed for water rates?
- The tenant is responsible for water consumption charges. 1 The landlord provided water rates invoices which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy. The amount claimed was $512.07 however as discussed at the hearing there was an incorrect calculation, and the correct amount is as follows: 10 May 2024 – 22 May 2024 - $22.39 22 May 2024 - 4 October 2024 - $94.81 4 October 2024 – 20 May 2025 - $225.49. 20 May 2025 – 23 October 2025 – $141.05 Total to end of tenancy - $483.74 The Law – tenant’s obligations at the end of the tenancy
- At the end of the tenancy the tenant must remove all his or her goods from the premises, leave the premises (including the land provided with the premises) reasonably clean and tidy, remove all rubbish, return all keys and security devices and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. 2 The Law - Tenants responsibility for damage 1 See section 39 RTA. 2 See section 40(1)(e) of the RTA.
- A tenant must not intentionally or carelessly cause damage or permit any other person to damage the premises. 3
- Where a landlord is claiming compensation for damage 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. 4
- Fair wear and tear can be described as damage which might reasonably be expected to naturally occur over time, such as the deterioration or gradual wear occurring with everyday use. 5
- 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). 6 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). 7 Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. 8
- 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. 9 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. 10
- In assessing a claim for compensation, I must take 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 must take into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan. Cleaning and rubbish removal 3 See s 40 (2)(a) of the RTA. 4 See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA. 5 See Taylor v Webb [1937] 2KB 283 (CA). 6 See section 49B(3)(a) RTA. 7 See section 49B(3)(b) RTA. 8 See section 49B(3A)(a) RTA. 9 See section 49B(1) RTA. 10 See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.
- The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
- The landlord claims $606.91 for cleaning and provided post tenancy photographs and an invoice in support of the claim. I queried why separate cleaners went on three separate days to clean the same parts of the house. The landlord explained that the owner required further cleaning to be undertaken as she was unhappy with the cleaning provided initially. In reviewing the photographs provided and noting that I consider it likely the initial cleaners would have ensured the premises was reasonably clean and tidy I will allow $350 of the amount claimed.
- The landlord claims $407.50 for lawn and garden work. The tenant did not remove weeds or grass clippings. Post tenancy photographs and an invoice was provided. I order the amount claimed for the lawn and garden work.
- The landlord claims $341.50 being part of a skip bin fee. The landlord provided post-tenancy photographs, emails confirming the tenant’s agreement to meeting half the cost of the skip bin and an invoice in support of the claim. I have ordered the amount claimed for the skip bin.
- The landlord claims $103.50 for the cleaning of the exterior walls of the premises. Post tenancy photographs and an invoice were provided in support of the claim. The invoice was for a total of $310.50 for the full exterior clean. Only a small area of the exterior had some mud or dirt on it. I will allow 1/8 of this invoice being $38.80.
- The amounts ordered are proved Chattels
- The following chattels were missing at the end of the tenancy: a. The heat pump remote was missing - $49 is ordered for its replacement. An invoice was provided in support of the claim. b. The garage door remote was missing - $200 is ordered for its replacement. An invoice was provided in support of the claim.
- The amounts ordered are proved. Windows
- Two windows were broken during the tenancy. The landlord provided photographs and an invoice in support of the claim. The amount claimed is $1,225.25. The price of one window repair was to be deducted from the invoice, however the claim has included the GST component of the window not claimed. I therefore deduct the GST amount and allow $1,194.39 of the claim. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The amount ordered is proved. Doors
- The landlord claims $984.85 for door damage. An invoice was provided in support of the claim. The hallway door was damaged and repaired (item 1 on the invoice). The bathroom door was damaged and repaired (item 2 on the invoice). A bedroom door was missing and replaced, (item 3 on the invoice) A further door had some wear and tear, the landlord claimed half the repair for this door (item 4 of the invoice). I decline to order compensation for item 4 as there is insufficient evidence that the damage is more than fair wear and tear. Item 5 is for the temporary board for where one door window was broken and this is allowed. The amount ordered is $883.91. Nets and curtains
- The landlord says the nets and a curtain were damaged during the tenancy. The landlord has claimed the cost for 7 nets, 2 rods and curtain hooks. There is insufficient evidence that nets were damaged during the tenancy. The main room nets were damaged at the end of the tenancy, but they were badly damaged at the commencement of the tenancy. There is insufficient evidence for me to find that there were 7 nets at the start of the tenancy which required replacement at the end of the tenancy. Accordingly, the claim in respect of the nets is dismissed.
- A curtain was stained during the tenancy. The landlord says they replaced the curtain but did not provide an invoice to prove the replacement cost. The price tag for the Briscoes curtain was provided, however noting the significant discount on the nets (stated in the Briscoes receipt) I cannot rule out that this landlord paid a significantly discounted price. In the absence of current information as to the price (i.e. recent quote or receipt) I consider the claim for the curtain is unproven and it is dismissed. I also note depreciation of at least 50% would have applied in any event. Bond
- The bond is to be paid to the landlord immediately to offset the amount’s ordered. Filing Fee
- Because the applicant has been wholly or partly successful in their claim, I have ordered that the respondent pay the applicant the application filing fee of $28. Suppression
- On my enquiry, the landlord did not seek name suppression.
Topics & place
Topics are dispute themes across the order (not the same as claim-type money lines).
Residential Tenancies Act sections
s19, s21, s22, s23, s3, s39, s40, s40(1), s40(2), s49B(1), s49B(3), s49B(3A)
Key findings
- Dispute theme: cleaning
- Dispute theme: property damage
Property management
Frequently asked questions
Common questions about this Tenancy Tribunal case.
What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5408449?
The tribunal order states: Donna Marie Rapana must pay Eves Realty Group Limited As Agent For Susan
How much money was awarded in case 5408449?
Cleaning: $350.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $38.80 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $407.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $1,194.39 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $883.91 awarded to landlord; Replace Garage Door Remote: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Replace Heatpump Remote: $49.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $341.50 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $483.74 awarded to landlord
What type of tenancy dispute was case 5408449?
The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Cleanliness.
Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5408449?
The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13362293-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.