Tenant Liable for Premises Damages - Tenancy Tribunal Judgment
📌 In brief
In this Tenancy Tribunal case, a landlord asked for money to cover plumbing and fencing repairs. The judge said the case needed more evidence and set a new hearing date. The case revolves around whether the tenant is responsible for the costs under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is liable for damage to the premises if the landlord proves the damage occurred during the tenancy and was not due to fair wear and tear.
📖 What the law says
This section outlines a tenant's responsibilities, including paying rent, keeping the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and notifying the landlord of any damage or needed repairs. When moving out, the tenant must leave the premises clean and tidy and remove all their belongings and rubbish.
This section states that a tenant is responsible for actions or inactions of anyone they allow onto the property, if those actions would have broken the tenancy agreement had the tenant done them. If someone intentionally or carelessly damages the property while the tenant is there, it is assumed the tenant allowed that person to be there.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal adjourned the hearing to determine the tenant's responsibility for plumbing and fencing damages.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal at Invercargill heard a case where a landlord sought reimbursement for plumbing and fencing damages. The issue was whether the tenant was liable for these costs under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The hearing was adjourned pending further evidence.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5445088 1
[2026] NZTT 5445088
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT INVERCARGILL | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA KI WAIHŌPAI
APPLICANT: [redacted] Williams & [ADDRESS]
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. The hearing is adjourned.
2. A further ninety minutes should be allowed for the next hearing of this matter, scheduled before me at this court on the next available date.
Reasons:
1. Both parties attended the hearing.
2. The landlord has applied for a monetary order seeking payment of a plumbing account and for damage to a fence.
3. The back ground is that this is a fixed term tenancy.
4. The landlord seeks reimbursement for a plumbing invoice that related to a blocked drain. There is the assumption that this was caused by the tenants son who put stones down the drain.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5445088 2
5. The landlord also seeks payment for a section of concrete fence that was knocked over4 and damaged. The issue for determination is whether the tenant is liable for the cost to fix the fence and the drain.
Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. 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.
12. I must take 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.
13. The tenant claims that there are ongoing issues with the drains and that her son would not have been left unsupervised outside and therefore disputes the fact that the drain blocked due to her or her sons’ actions.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5445088 3
14. Further in relation to the fence this maybe covered by the owners insurance. Having discussed this with the parties it was agreed how the landowner could source the information to provide to their insurance.
15. On this basis I adjourn the case to come back before me.
16. The parties will be notified in writing by Tenancy Services of the date and time of the next hearing.
17. If either party wishes to submit any evidence in advance of the hearing they are to do so and provide a copy to the other party.
S Munro
13 April 2026
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5445088 4
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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5445088 5
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:
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The landlord needs to prove that damage happened during the tenancy and is more than normal wear and tear.
- If the landlord proves the damage, the tenant must then prove they did not carelessly or intentionally cause it.
- Tenants are responsible for damage caused by people they allow on the property.
- The case was adjourned to allow the landowner to gather information for their insurance regarding the fence damage.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The tenant claims there are ongoing issues with the drains.
- The tenant claims her son would not have been left unsupervised outside.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The case was adjourned until more evidence could be presented.
What was the dispute about?
The landlord wanted the tenant to pay for plumbing repairs and fencing damage.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to adjourn the case because more evidence was needed to determine the tenant's liability.
Which laws or rules were applied?
Sections 40(2)(a), 41, and 49B of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument centered on whether the tenant was responsible for the damages under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was neither for nor against the person who brought the case, as it was adjourned.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should gather all relevant evidence to present at the hearing.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The judgment does not specify the exact evidence or documents that mattered.