Tenantcheck Insights · Case study
Tenancy Tribunal case 5467029 — Rent arrears at 54 Cargill Street, Dunedin Central, Dunedin 9016
Published 30 April 2026 · Application 5467029
Landlord favoured
- Rent arrears
- Property damage
- Cleanliness
At a glance
Key facts from the published tribunal order.
Outcome
Landlord favoured
From published order
Location
Dunedin
Tribunal region
Adjudicator
J Wilson
Dispute themes
Award balance
Gross awards, any bond applied per the order, and the remaining balance payable.
- Gross award
- $10,542.33
- Bond payment as ordered
- −$2,600.00
- Total balance for Tenant to pay Landlord
- $7,942.33
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 8/1/2026 | $3,210.00 | Rent arrears to 8/1/2026 | |
| Previous order application 5300067 dated 02/10/2025 | $3,867.58 | Previous order application 5300067 dated 02/10/2025 | |
| Rubbish removal | $97.75 | Rubbish removal | |
| Clean of green bin | $29.00 | Clean of green bin | |
| Cleaning | $500.00 | Cleaning | |
| Key replacement | $50.00 | Key replacement | |
| Insurance excess for carpet replacement | $2,760.00 | Insurance excess for carpet replacement | |
| Filing fee reimbursement | $28.00 | Filing fee reimbursement | |
| Net award | $7,942.33 | ||
| Total payable by Tenant to Landlord | $7,942.33 |
Claims and awards for application 5467029 — net $7,942.33 NZD. Verify on MoJ.
Rent arrears to 8/1/2026
- Amount
- $3,210.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Rent arrears to 8/1/2026
Previous order application 5300067 dated 02/10/2025
- Amount
- $3,867.58
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Previous order application 5300067 dated 02/10/2025
Rubbish removal
- Amount
- $97.75
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Rubbish removal
Clean of green bin
- Amount
- $29.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Clean of green bin
Cleaning
- Amount
- $500.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Cleaning
Key replacement
- Amount
- $50.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Key replacement
Insurance excess for carpet replacement
- Amount
- $2,760.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Insurance excess for carpet replacement
Filing fee reimbursement
- Amount
- $28.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Filing fee reimbursement
Net award
Landlord $7,942.33
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord
Landlord $7,942.33
Claim types — money lines allowed on this order
Order
- Sioesi Taliala and Takilopa Suini must pay Click Property Management Limited As Agents For Sherwin and Shelson Borges $7,942.33 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
- The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,600.00 (3097006-021) to Click Property Management Limited As Agents For Sherwin and Shelson Borges immediately.
- This order incorporates the order of the Tribunal dated 2/10/2025, application 5300067.
Reasons
- Both parties attended the hearing, the tenant by telephone.
- The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
- For enforcement purposes the landlord also sought incorporation of the previous order made on 2/10/2025 under application 5300067.
How much is owed for rent?
- The fixed term tenancy ended on 8/1/2026.
- The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.
- The tenant did not dispute the rent arrears.
- An award has been made for arrears from 3/10/2025 to 8/1/2026.
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 tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
- The landlord claimed compensation of $1,131.25 as follows: a. $29.00 for cleaning of the green bin, b. $57.50 for replacement of the yellow bin, c. $97.75 for external rubbish removal, d. $897.00 for internal cleaning, e. $50.00 for replacement of five keys.
- In support of the claim the landlord provided entry and exit reports with photographs dated 19/7/2024 and 9/1/2026 respectively and invoices.
- The tenant agreed with the compensation claims for cleaning of the bin, rubbish removal and replacement keys.
- However, the tenant submitted that she had cleaned the premises before she left and explained what cleaning she had undertaken.
- The tenant advised that she had taken a short video of the cleaning and carpets but declined the opportunity to have the matter adjourned so the video could be provided.
- I am persuaded by the evidence that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, did not remove all rubbish or return all keys.
- Awards have been made for the undisputed claims.
- No award is made for the replacement of the yellow bin because the landlord was unable to provide a receipt to support the claim.
- The amount claimed for cleaning has been reduced to reflect the evidence of the tenant that some cleaning was undertaken.
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.
- Just prior to the hearing the landlord sought compensation of $6,000.00 being the insurance excesses for replacement of carpets in six rooms.
- Due to the insurance claim the landlord withdrew the claim of $580.00 for carpet cleaning.
- In support of the claim the landlord provided photographs taken on 15/1/2026 of staining after the carpet cleaning in the lounge, hallway, and bedrooms1 and 2.
- The landlord submitted that although there were existing stains in the hallway and lounge before the tenancy began there were no stains in bedrooms 3, 4 and 5.
- Although the tenant had only been made aware of the insurance claim the day prior to the hearing she wanted the matter dealt with today.
- The tenant accepted that some staining had occurred to the lounge carpet from food but disputed other staining.
- 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.
- I am satisfied that damage by way of staining was caused during the tenancy to carpets.
- The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has agreed to damage to the lounge carpet.
- However, based on the evidence from the entry inspection report I do not consider the tenant is liable for replacement of carpet in six rooms because of stains existing prior to the beginning of the tenancy.
- I have also 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 considered the age and condition of the items, around five years old at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.
- As the damage is covered by the landlord’s insurance, I have determined the liability of the tenant as four weeks rent, being $2,760.00.
- As Click Property Management Limited As Agents For Sherwin and Shelson Borges has substantially succeeded with the claim I have awarded the filing fee.
Topics & place
Topics are dispute themes across the order (not the same as claim-type money lines).
Residential Tenancies Act sections
s1, s3, s40(1), s40(2), s49B, s49B(3)
Key findings
- Dispute theme: rent arrears
- 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 5467029?
The tribunal order states: Sioesi Taliala and Takilopa Suini must pay Click Property Management Limited
How much money was awarded in case 5467029?
Cleaning: $29.00 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Previous Order Application 5300067 D…: $3,867.58 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $50.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $2,760.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $3,210.00 awarded to landlord; Rubbish Removal: $97.75 awarded to landlord
What type of tenancy dispute was case 5467029?
The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage, Cleanliness.
Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5467029?
The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13524266-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.