Tenantcheck Insights · Case study
Tenancy Tribunal case 5440779 — Property damage at 34 Rena Place, West Harbour, Auckland 0618
Published 13 May 2026 · Application 5440779
Landlord favoured
- Property damage
At a glance
Key facts from the published tribunal order.
Outcome
Landlord favoured
From published order
Location
Auckland
Tribunal region
Adjudicator
S Young
Dispute themes
Award balance
Gross awards, any bond applied per the order, and the remaining balance payable.
- Gross award
- $2,969.92
- Total balance for Tenant to pay Landlord
- $2,969.92
Claims & awards
What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.
| Claim | Landlord | Tenant | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rubbish removal | $1,434.00 | Rubbish removal | |
| Lawns and Garden work | $750.00 | Lawns and Garden work | |
| Repairs: Carpet | $519.00 | Repairs: Carpet | |
| Repairs: Patch holes | $161.40 | Repairs: Patch holes | |
| Repairs: Doorknob | $105.52 | Repairs: Doorknob | |
| Net award | $2,969.92 | ||
| Total payable by Tenant to Landlord | $2,969.92 |
Claims and awards for application 5440779 — net $2,969.92 NZD. Verify on MoJ.
Rubbish removal
- Amount
- $1,434.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Rubbish removal
Lawns and Garden work
- Amount
- $750.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Lawns and Garden work
Repairs: Carpet
- Amount
- $519.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Repairs: Carpet
Repairs: Patch holes
- Amount
- $161.40
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Repairs: Patch holes
Repairs: Doorknob
- Amount
- $105.52
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Repairs: Doorknob
Net award
Landlord $2,969.92
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord
Landlord $2,969.92
Claim types — money lines allowed on this order
Order
- Amberlee Roff must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities $2,969.92 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
Reasons
- The landlord attended the remote hearing.
- The tenant did not attend the hearing by Teams video link. The Tribunal may hear matters in the absence of a party where satisfied that notice of the hearing has been given. I am satisfied that notice of the hearing was given to the tenant.
- 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 and remove all rubbish. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
- The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.
- The landlord applied for compensation of $1,500.00 for slashing and disposing of grass at the premises. The premises are a large section. Photos provided by the landlord show that the lawns were substantially overgrown. Despite that, I consider that the amount of the claim is not reasonable. Having reviewed the photos, I consider that a reasonable cost for slashing and disposing of the grass is $750.00.
- The landlord applied for compensation of $1,434.00 for exterior rubbish removal. The landlord provided photos of the exterior showing that the tenant had left personal effects and rubbish at the premises. The amount claimed is reasonable.
- The amounts ordered are proven.
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:
- Holes were made in the walls. The landlord provided photos of the damage. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The landlord claimed $161.40.
- Carpet in two areas of the premises were damaged. The damage consisted of dog and urine odour that could not be removed as well as damage to the carpet. The landlord provided photos of the damage. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The landlord claimed $519.00.
- A bathroom privacy doorknob was missing. The landlord provided a photo taken of the bathroom door at the commencement of the tenancy showing that the knob was present. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The landlord claimed $105.52.
- The amounts ordered are proven.
- 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: property damage
Frequently asked questions
Common questions about this Tenancy Tribunal case.
What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5440779?
The tribunal order states: Amberlee Roff must pay Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities $2,969.92
How much money was awarded in case 5440779?
Lawns and Garden Work: $750.00 awarded to landlord; Carpet: $519.00 awarded to landlord; Doorknob: $105.52 awarded to landlord; Patch Holes: $161.40 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $1,434.00 awarded to landlord
What type of tenancy dispute was case 5440779?
The primary dispute was Property damage.
Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5440779?
The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13588891-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.