What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5437742?

The tribunal order states: Yip Siu Man and Wong Ching Kwan must pay Wolfbrook Property Management

How much money was awarded in case 5437742?

Cleaning: $485.50 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Reletting Costs: $920.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,514.29 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5437742?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5437742?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13494813-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5437742?

The tribunal order states: Yip Siu Man and Wong Ching Kwan must pay Wolfbrook Property Management

How much money was awarded in case 5437742?

Cleaning: $485.50 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Reletting Costs: $920.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,514.29 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5437742?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5437742?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13494813-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat Unit 4, 55 Centennial Avenue, Riccarton, Tenancy Tribunal Case 5437742 — Rent arrears

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5437742 — net $1,747.79 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears (to 19 January 2026	$2,514.29	Rent arrears (to 19 January 2026
Cleaning	$485.50	Cleaning
Reletting costs	$920.00	Reletting costs
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,747.79
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,747.79

On 3 February 2026, the landlord filed an application with the Tribunal seeking rent arrears, refund of the bond, compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

The hearing proceeded by way of video conference. Mr John Caughtry, Property Manager, appeared for the landlord. The tenants failed to appear. The Tribunal was satisfied the tenants were properly served with the notice of hearing and the case proceeded in their absence.

This application only named Yip Siu Man as the respondent to the landlord’s claims. The Tenancy agreement records that Yip Siu Man and Wong Ching Kwan are joint tenants of the property. The Tribunal has amended the claim to reflect that Yip Siu Man and Wong Ching Kwan are jointly and severally liable for the debts arising out of the tenancy. History of the tenancy

The tenancy commenced on 11 April 2025 with the fixed term expiring on 12 April 2026.

On 28 December 2025, the landlord received an email from the tenants advising: “...we have permanently vacated the above property and returned to our home country as of 18 December 2024. We will not be returning to New Zealand. The property has been left clean and tidy. The keys have been left on the kitchen bench inside the property. Given our permanent departure, we consider the tenancy mutually terminated as of the vacate date. We will not be making any further payments. You are free to re-let the property immediately... .”

On 20 January 2026 new tenants moved into the property.

How much is owed for rent?

The landlord told the Tribunal the tenancy ended after the tenants abandoned the property during the fixed term.

The landlord secure new tenants who moved into the property on 20 January 2026.

The landlord seeks rent arrears until 19 January 2026 and provided rent records which prove the amount owing. The amount claimed is ordered.

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 “Act”).

The landlord seeks $485.50 compensation after paying a contractor to clean the property to a reasonably clean and tidy condition and remove all rubbish. An invoice in the amount claimed was provided.

The landlord provided pre-tenancy inspection report with photographs which proved the condition of the property at the commencement of the tenancy. The tribunal heard the property was brand new and the entry report proves the property was provided in a clean and tidy condition, free from rubbish.

The Tribunal was provided with an exit inspection report and photographs which showed the property was not returned in a reasonably clean and tidy condition when abandoned during the fixed term. The kitchen cupboards had not been completely emptied or wiped out. The electric hob was marked. The toilet and bathroom had not been cleaned. The floors needed to be vacuumed and mopped and the walls, windows sills and skirting boards needed to be wiped and dusted. In addition the tenants had failed to remove all rubbish, in particular a mattress was left outside the property.

The Tribunal was able to make a proper before and after comparison of the condition of the property at the beginning and end of the tenancy. Having heard from the landlord and reviewing all of the evidence the Tribunal is satisfied the tenants failed to return the property in a reasonable clean and tidy condition free from rubbish and the amount claimed is reasonable.

Is the tenant liable to pay reletting costs?

The landlord seeks $920.00 reletting costs after the tenants vacated the property inside of the fixed term without notice or the consent of the landlord. A tenant invoice for the amount claimed was provided.

The landlord told the Tribunal the amount claimed is made up of the following charges: a. Advertising charges for Trademe ($125.00 + GST), Real Estate.co.nz, and their own website (free). b. Four or five property viewings - $60.00 + GST per viewing. c. Vetting checks x 3 - $60.00 + GST per vetting check. d. Ingoing inspection costs - $55.00 + GST. e. Document preparation and administration costs - 2-3 hours at $75.00 +GST per hour

Having heard from the landlord and considering all of the evidence I am satisfied the landlord has incurred expenses to relet the premises and the costs claimed are reasonable in the circumstances. The amount claimed is ordered. Other matters

Because Wolfbrook Property Management Limited has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Despite being wholly successful the landlord did not seek name suppression.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5437742 — net $1,747.79 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears (to 19 January 2026	$2,514.29	Rent arrears (to 19 January 2026
Cleaning	$485.50	Cleaning
Reletting costs	$920.00	Reletting costs
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,747.79
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,747.79

Order

Yip Siu Man and Wong Ching Kwan must pay Wolfbrook Property Management Limited $1,747.79 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,200.00 (BN-00070115) to Wolfbrook Property Management Limited immediately.

Reasons

On 3 February 2026, the landlord filed an application with the Tribunal seeking rent arrears, refund of the bond, compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The hearing proceeded by way of video conference. Mr John Caughtry, Property Manager, appeared for the landlord. The tenants failed to appear. The Tribunal was satisfied the tenants were properly served with the notice of hearing and the case proceeded in their absence.
This application only named Yip Siu Man as the respondent to the landlord’s claims. The Tenancy agreement records that Yip Siu Man and Wong Ching Kwan are joint tenants of the property. The Tribunal has amended the claim to reflect that Yip Siu Man and Wong Ching Kwan are jointly and severally liable for the debts arising out of the tenancy. History of the tenancy
The tenancy commenced on 11 April 2025 with the fixed term expiring on 12 April 2026.
On 28 December 2025, the landlord received an email from the tenants advising: “...we have permanently vacated the above property and returned to our home country as of 18 December 2024. We will not be returning to New Zealand. The property has been left clean and tidy. The keys have been left on the kitchen bench inside the property. Given our permanent departure, we consider the tenancy mutually terminated as of the vacate date. We will not be making any further payments. You are free to re-let the property immediately... .”
On 20 January 2026 new tenants moved into the property.

How much is owed for rent?

The landlord told the Tribunal the tenancy ended after the tenants abandoned the property during the fixed term.
The landlord secure new tenants who moved into the property on 20 January 2026.
The landlord seeks rent arrears until 19 January 2026 and provided rent records which prove the amount owing. The amount claimed is ordered.

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 “Act”).
The landlord seeks $485.50 compensation after paying a contractor to clean the property to a reasonably clean and tidy condition and remove all rubbish. An invoice in the amount claimed was provided.
The landlord provided pre-tenancy inspection report with photographs which proved the condition of the property at the commencement of the tenancy. The tribunal heard the property was brand new and the entry report proves the property was provided in a clean and tidy condition, free from rubbish.
The Tribunal was provided with an exit inspection report and photographs which showed the property was not returned in a reasonably clean and tidy condition when abandoned during the fixed term. The kitchen cupboards had not been completely emptied or wiped out. The electric hob was marked. The toilet and bathroom had not been cleaned. The floors needed to be vacuumed and mopped and the walls, windows sills and skirting boards needed to be wiped and dusted. In addition the tenants had failed to remove all rubbish, in particular a mattress was left outside the property.
The Tribunal was able to make a proper before and after comparison of the condition of the property at the beginning and end of the tenancy. Having heard from the landlord and reviewing all of the evidence the Tribunal is satisfied the tenants failed to return the property in a reasonable clean and tidy condition free from rubbish and the amount claimed is reasonable.

Is the tenant liable to pay reletting costs?

The landlord seeks $920.00 reletting costs after the tenants vacated the property inside of the fixed term without notice or the consent of the landlord. A tenant invoice for the amount claimed was provided.
The landlord told the Tribunal the amount claimed is made up of the following charges: a. Advertising charges for Trademe ($125.00 + GST), Real Estate.co.nz, and their own website (free). b. Four or five property viewings - $60.00 + GST per viewing. c. Vetting checks x 3 - $60.00 + GST per vetting check. d. Ingoing inspection costs - $55.00 + GST. e. Document preparation and administration costs - 2-3 hours at $75.00 +GST per hour
Having heard from the landlord and considering all of the evidence I am satisfied the landlord has incurred expenses to relet the premises and the costs claimed are reasonable in the circumstances. The amount claimed is ordered. Other matters
Because Wolfbrook Property Management Limited has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
Despite being wholly successful the landlord did not seek name suppression.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5437742 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat Unit 4, 55 Centennial Avenue, Riccarton,

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5437742 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat Unit 4, 55 Centennial Avenue, Riccarton,

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

Is the tenant liable to pay reletting costs?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

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

Is the tenant liable to pay reletting costs?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions