What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5435388?

The tribunal order states: Faleifiso Susitina Tanuvasa must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities

How much money was awarded in case 5435388?

Property Damage: $343.69 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,022.16 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5435388?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5435388?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13777878-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5435388?

The tribunal order states: Faleifiso Susitina Tanuvasa must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities

How much money was awarded in case 5435388?

Property Damage: $343.69 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,022.16 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5435388?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5435388?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13777878-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

28 Frank Bunce Grove, Flat Bush, Auckland 2019 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5435388 — Property damage

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5435388 — net $1,365.85 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rubbish removal	$1,022.16	Rubbish removal
Repairs	$343.69	Repairs
Net award	$1,365.85
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,365.85

The landlord attended the hearing. There was no appearance from the tenant.

The landlord has applied for compensation following the end of the tenancy, which was on 11 July 2025.

At the end of the tenancy, the tenant signed a letter providing an email address for all contact following the end of the tenancy. Although it did not specify that it was an “address for service”, it is recorded that the email address will be used by Kainga Ora to communicate with him.

That address has been used as an address for service, and the notice of this hearing was sent there. I am satisfied that the tenant has had notice of the hearing.

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

At the end of the tenancy the tenant must remove all rubbish.

The landlord provided photographs which show that the tenant left a lot of items inside and outside the property. These included some mattresses and other large items. The landlord claimed $492.36 for the exterior and $529.80 for the interior.

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 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 landlord provided photographs which show holes in th garage wall, bedroom, bathroom and hallway. Although there were no entry inspection photos, the tenancy lasted almost 23 years. I am satisfied that it is more likely than not that the damage was caused during the tenancy. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The landlord provided an itemised account for repairs to holes: a. Garage $86.68 b. Bedroom $86.68 c. Bathroom $43.34 d. Hallway $126.96

The amounts ordered are proved.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5435388 — net $1,365.85 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rubbish removal	$1,022.16	Rubbish removal
Repairs	$343.69	Repairs
Net award	$1,365.85
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,365.85

Order

Faleifiso Susitina Tanuvasa must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities $1,365.85 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. There was no appearance from the tenant.
The landlord has applied for compensation following the end of the tenancy, which was on 11 July 2025.
At the end of the tenancy, the tenant signed a letter providing an email address for all contact following the end of the tenancy. Although it did not specify that it was an “address for service”, it is recorded that the email address will be used by Kainga Ora to communicate with him.
That address has been used as an address for service, and the notice of this hearing was sent there. I am satisfied that the tenant has had notice of the hearing.

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

At the end of the tenancy the tenant must remove all rubbish.
The landlord provided photographs which show that the tenant left a lot of items inside and outside the property. These included some mattresses and other large items. The landlord claimed $492.36 for the exterior and $529.80 for the interior.
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 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 landlord provided photographs which show holes in th garage wall, bedroom, bathroom and hallway. Although there were no entry inspection photos, the tenancy lasted almost 23 years. I am satisfied that it is more likely than not that the damage was caused during the tenancy. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
The landlord provided an itemised account for repairs to holes: a. Garage $86.68 b. Bedroom $86.68 c. Bathroom $43.34 d. Hallway $126.96
The amounts ordered are proved.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5435388 — Property damage at 28 Frank Bunce Grove, Flat Bush, Auckland 2019

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5435388 — Property damage at 28 Frank Bunce Grove, Flat Bush, Auckland 2019

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions