Tenantcheck Insights · Case study
Tenancy Tribunal case 5434929 — Cleanliness at 9 Tacitus Place, Totara Vale, Auckland 0629
Published 14 May 2026 · Application 5434929
Landlord favoured
- Cleanliness
- 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
T Prowse
Dispute themes
Award balance
Gross awards, any bond applied per the order, and the remaining balance payable.
- Gross award
- $2,189.00
- Bond payment as ordered
- −$436.00
- Total balance for Tenant to pay Landlord
- $1,753.00
Claims & awards
What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.
| Claim | Landlord | Tenant | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rent arrears to 22/12/2025 | $312.86 | Rent arrears to 22/12/2025 | |
| Repairs: Patch holes x 8 | $352.09 | Repairs: Patch holes x 8 | |
| Cleaning | $692.75 | Cleaning | |
| Rubbish removal | $537.75 | Rubbish removal | |
| Lawns and Garden work | $200.00 | Lawns and Garden work | |
| Repairs: repair hole in door EH1 | $93.55 | Repairs: repair hole in door EH1 | |
| Net award | $1,753.00 | ||
| Total payable by Tenant to Landlord | $1,753.00 |
Claims and awards for application 5434929 — net $1,753.00 NZD. Verify on MoJ.
Rent arrears to 22/12/2025
- Amount
- $312.86
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Rent arrears to 22/12/2025
Repairs: Patch holes x 8
- Amount
- $352.09
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Repairs: Patch holes x 8
Cleaning
- Amount
- $692.75
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Cleaning
Rubbish removal
- Amount
- $537.75
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Rubbish removal
Lawns and Garden work
- Amount
- $200.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Lawns and Garden work
Repairs: repair hole in door EH1
- Amount
- $93.55
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Repairs: repair hole in door EH1
Net award
Landlord $1,753.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord
Landlord $1,753.00
Claim types — money lines allowed on this order
Order
- Laniuma Helen Kata must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities $1,753.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
- The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $436.00 (3514371-003) to Kāinga Ora– Homes And Communities immediately.
Reasons
- Ms Gray for the landlord attended today’s hearing. The tenant did not attend. Ms Gray informed the Tribunal that the tenant had emailed the landlord to say that she was in Australia and would not be attending today’s hearing. I have proceeded in her absence.
- This was a tenancy of 9.5 years. The tenant lived in the 5-bedroom home with her 7 young children, who at the beginning of the tenancy were aged 0-10.
- The landlord inspected the property annually. The tenant appears to have kept the property in a good condition. The only notice that the tenant was given in respect of the property was a notice to remove an illegal structure in 2023, which the tenant appears to have complied with.
- The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation for carpet replacement, repair of walls and doors, cleaning, rubbish removal and removal of green waste, following the end of the tenancy.
How much is owed for rent?
- The tenancy ended on the 22 December 2025, 21 days after the tenant gave notice by text. 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 landlord provided photographs of the property taken at the vacate inspection on the 23 December 2025, they show that whilst some attempt has been made to clean the house, the property has not been left in a reasonably clean and tidy condition, there are cupboards that need to be cleared and cleaned, windows, walls, kitchen and bathroom surfaces and ceilings that need to be wiped down. The oven is also very dirty.
- The tenant left belongings and rubbish both in and around the property which the landlord had to dispose of. This included a large mattress and other materials that appear to have been used in the construction of a structure that the tenant was asked to remove in 2023.
- The tenant was required to keep the lawns and gardens reasonably maintained. The landlord sought $1017.00 for the removal of garden waste from the top retaining wall. The photographs provided show that the vegetation on the retaining wall is overgrown, but some of the plants, such as the trees of woolly nightshade were the landlord’s obligation to remove because large plants such as trees are not included in the tenant’s obligation to do lawns and gardens, they are part of the landlord’s obligation to maintain. The works order shows that the woolly nightshade trees and other large plants on the retaining wall were cut down. It is unclear if the garden waste included the remnants of those trees, if so then the tenant would not be responsible for the removal of that waste.
- I have awarded the landlord $200 for the grass slash and removal of the grass and other green waste around the property, as I consider that a reasonable amount based on the photographs in the inspection report.
- 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. Carpets.
- The landlord sought a depreciated amount for the carpets which needed replacement as they were heavily soiled and stained.
- Whilst I accept that the carpets are heavily soiled and stained and appear to be above that of normal wear and tear in some areas, I do not consider that I can award any compensation to the landlord as the carpets are outside their depreciable lifespan as per the IRD’s depreciation schedule (IR265, August 2024 page 36) for chattels in a residential tenancy, which lists the estimated life span of carpets at 8 years. Holes in the walls.
- I accept that there were holes in the walls in bedroom 1 (1 hole), bedroom 2 (6 holes) and the bathroom (1 hole). I also accept that there was a hole in the entrance hall door. This damage is more than fair wear and tear and the tenant is responsible for the repair.
- The landlord provided me with a copy of the costs of repair and I consider those reasonable.
- The landlord also asked for the cost of repair for two other holes in bedroom 4 and living room 1, but I consider that those dents/holes are more than likely from fair wear and tear of having 9 people living in a home rather than careless or intentional damage, and those claims are dismissed.
- 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. Observations.
- I observe that the vacated inspection report that I was given described the rooms as being in average condition, despite a room having multiple holes in the walls and soiled carpet, and no notes were recorded as to the specific damage on each room. The only damage that was noted was seen in the photographs. I have expressed my concerns about the lack of detail given in these reports, if the landlord is seeking to rely on these reports as the foundation of its claims for damage to the property, then there should be a detailed description of the damage in each room which then aligns with the photographs provided.
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
- Dispute theme: cleaning
Frequently asked questions
Common questions about this Tenancy Tribunal case.
What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5434929?
The tribunal order states: Laniuma Helen Kata must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities $1,753.00
How much money was awarded in case 5434929?
Cleaning: $692.75 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $200.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $312.86 awarded to landlord; Patch Holes X 8: $352.09 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $93.55 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $537.75 awarded to landlord
What type of tenancy dispute was case 5434929?
The primary dispute was Cleanliness. Related themes: Property damage, Rent arrears.
Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5434929?
The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13596793-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.