Landlord's Compensation Claim Rejected in Tenancy Dispute

OUTCOME: Dismissed

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5472847 1

[2026] NZTT 5472847

TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT REMOTE LOCATION | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA

APPLICANT: [redacted]

Landlord

RESPONDENT: [redacted] [NAME]

Tenant

TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

AMENDED ORDER

1. This order replaces the earlier order dated 2 June 2026 and is only in respect of case 5472847.

2. The tenant party name is amended to be [APPELLANT] [NAME] aka [APPELLANT] aka [NAME] [NAME].

3. In all other respects the order remains the same as recorded below.

4. The application for termination is withdrawn by the landlord.

5. The applications for compensation for damage and suppression are dismissed.

Reasons:

1. Both parties attended the hearing which took place by teleconference in respect of case 5472847 which was scheduled before me.

2. The application names the tenant as [NAME]. The tenancy agreement names the tenant as [APPELLANT] [NAME]. The tenant advised that his correct legal name is [APPELLANT] [NAME] and provided a driver’s license with this name.

3. The party name is amended to be [NAME] [NAME] aka [NAME] [NAME] aka [NAME].

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5472847 2

4. In all other respects the reasons remain the same as recorded below.

5. The tenant rented a room in a three bedroom premises which had a maximum of five occupants during the tenancy.

6. In November and December some of the tenants moved out and new tenants moved into the other rooms soon afterwards.

7. The landlord filed a claim for termination due to breaches by the tenant and compensation for damage to a deck.

8. At the hearing the parties advised that the tenancy ended in May 2026 so the order for termination was no longer sought.

9. The burden of proof is on the party who brings a claim to the Tenancy Tribunal (in this case the landlord) to prove the claim on the balance of probabilities (more likely than not). They must prove that the other party has breached its obligations and the loss (or consequence) they have suffered because of that breach together with the cost to remedy. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden of proof

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

10. 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.

11. 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.

12. 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.

13. 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.

14. The landlord claimed that the following damage was caused during the tenancy:

(a)Black marks on the deck.

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5472847 3

(b)The landlord provided photographs of the marks on the deck taken in October 2025. A photograph taken in February 2026 of the tenant’s shoes, a cloth with black marks on it and a small black mark on the deck. The landlord also provided copies of messages which included a message to the tenant on 31 October 2025 accusing him of causing the marks and the tenant responding that he is overseas.

(c)The tenant denied causing the damage and provided evidence that he was overseas from early October 2025 and not in the country at the time the landlord discovered and accused him of causing the damage.

(d)The landlord responded that the other tenants told her the damage was caused by the tenant prior to him leaving the country.

(e)The landlord further claimed that the cloth with black marks on discovered near the tenant’s shoes in February 2026 was evidence that he caused the damage. The tenant stated that the cloth did not belong to him.

(f)The landlord did not quantify the amount sought to remedy the damage and stated that the other tenants cleaned the marks and then she cleaned anything remaining.

15. Having considered the evidence I find that the landlord has failed to prove the claim on the balance of probabilities for the following reasons:

(a)The landlord discovered the damage when the tenant was overseas and as she does not live at the property stated that she relied on what the other tenants told her. As the tenant disputes this evidence, I am not satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the damage was caused before the tenant left the country.

(b)I am not satisfied that the presence of a cloth with marks on it outside the house is sufficient to prove that it is owned by this tenant or that it proves the tenant caused marks on the deck.

(c)When there are multiple tenancies in respect of the same premises it is very difficult to prove who caused damage in a common area especially when the tenants are blaming each other.

(d)The landlord has also not provided any evidence of the cost to remedy the damage.

(e)For the above reasons I find that the claim is not proved on the balance of probabilities.

16. The landlord is seeking suppression of identifying details in any publication of this order. If a party has wholly or substantially succeeded in the proceedings the Tribunal must make the order unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case. Section 95A Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5472847 4

applicant has applied for suppression but as they have not been successful with the claim the application for suppression is declined.

[NAME]

02 June 2026

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5472847 5

Please read carefully: Visit justice.govt.nz/tribunals/tenancy/rehearings-appeals for more information on rehearings and appeals.

Rehearings You can apply for a rehearing if you believe that a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice has happened. For example: • you did not get the letter telling you the date of the hearing, or • the adjudicator improperly admitted or rejected evidence, or • new evidence, relating to the original application, has become available.

You must give reasons and evidence to support your application for a rehearing. A rehearing will not be granted just because you disagree with the decision. You must apply within five working days of the decision using the Application for Rehearing form: justice.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Forms/TT-Application-for-rehearing.pdf

Right of Appeal Both the landlord and the tenant can file an appeal. You should file your appeal at the District Court where the original hearing took place. The cost for an appeal is $260. You must apply within 10 working days after the decision is issued using this Appeal to the District Court form: justice.govt.nz/tribunals/tenancy/rehearings-appeals

Grounds for an appeal You can appeal if you think the decision was wrong, but not because you don’t like the decision. For some cases, there’ll be no right to appeal. For example, you can’t appeal: • against an interim order • a final order, or the failure to make an order, where the amount in dispute on appeal is

less than $1000 • a final order to undertake work, or the failure to make an order, where the value of the

work in dispute on appeal is less than $1000.

Enforcement Where the Tribunal made an order about money or property this is called a civil debt. The Ministry of Justice Collections Team can assist with enforcing civil debt. You can contact the collections team on [PHONE] or go to justice.govt.nz/fines/civil-debt for forms and information.

Notice to a party ordered to pay money or vacate premises, etc. Failure to comply with any order may result in substantial additional costs for enforcement. It may also involve being ordered to appear in the District Court for an examination of your means or seizure of your property.

If you require further help or information regarding this matter, visit tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing- decisions or phone Tenancy Services on [PHONE].

Mēna ka hiahia koe ki ētahi atu awhina, kōrero ranei mo tēnei take, haere ki tenei ipurangi tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions, waea atu ki Ratonga Takirua ma runga [PHONE] ranei.

https://www.justice.govt.nz/tribunals/tenancy/rehearings-appeals https://www.justice.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Forms/TT-Application-for-rehearing.pdf https://www.justice.govt.nz/tribunals/tenancy/rehearings-appeals/ https://www.justice.govt.nz/fines/about-civil-debt/ https://www.tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions https://www.tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions http://www.tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions/

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5472847 6

A manaomia nisi faamatalaga poo se fesoasoani, e uiga i lau mataupu, asiasi ifo le matou aupega tafailagi: tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions, pe fesootai mai le Tenancy Services i le numera [PHONE].

Reasons: