Tenant Ordered to Maintain Premises or Pay $250
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal ordered the tenant to either mow the lawn or pay $250 to the landlord. The tenant was found to have neglected the lawn maintenance as required by their agreement.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant must maintain the premises according to their agreement and the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
📖 What the law says
This section outlines a tenant's responsibilities, including keeping the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and leaving them in that condition when the tenancy ends. It also requires the tenant to pay rent, use the premises mainly for living, and tell the landlord about any damage or needed repairs.
This section explains that the Tenancy Tribunal can make various orders when it hears a case. These orders can include declaring the rights or responsibilities of a party, or ordering a party to give possession of premises or specific items to another party, or to pay money.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal ordered the tenant to either mow the lawn or pay $250 to the landlord.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal ordered the tenant to either mow the lawn or pay $250 to the landlord for failing to maintain the premises as required under their agreement and the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5231652 1
[2025] NZTT 5231652
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT REMOTE LOCATION | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: 939B High Street, Avalon, Lower Hutt 5011
ORDER
1. The tenant must carry out the following work to the premises, which must be completed by 5.00 pm on Monday 2 June:
a. Lawns to be mowed.
2. As an alternative to compliance with Order 1, the tenant must pay the landlord $250.00 immediately.
3. If the tenant fails to comply with either Order 1 or 2 above, then the landlord may undertake the work and charge the tenant the costs of this work up to $250.00. These costs may be treated as rent in arrears and enforced accordingly.
Reasons:
1. The landlord attended the hearing which was held by teleconference. The tenant did not answer any of the calls made at the scheduled time on the two numbers provided to the Tribunal.
2. The tenant has been served by post to his residential address.
3. Because I am satisfied the tenant has been served notice of the hearing in accordance with the Residential Tenancies Act, 1986 and the tenant has not requested an adjournment, the hearing was conducted in the tenant’s absence.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5231652 2
4. The landlord claims that the tenant has not mowed the lawn recently and the lawn is now very long. Under the tenancy agreement the tenant is responsible for maintaining the lawn. The landlord wants the problem fixed.
5. Under section 40(1)(a)-(e), Residential Tenancies Act 1986, a tenant has specific obligations in relation to the tenancy premises.
6. Where the Tribunal finds the tenant has failed to comply with any of these obligations, where appropriate it may make an order for the landlord to carry out the work. See section 78(1)(e) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
7. If the work order is not being made by consent of both parties, the Tribunal must also make a monetary order as an alternative to compliance with the work order. See sections 78(2) and 78(2AA) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
8. A work order may also authorise the landlord to undertake the work and charge the tenant the costs of doing the work, if the tenant should fail to comply with the work order and alternative monetary order. These costs can be treated as rent in arrears and enforced accordingly. See sections 78(2AAB) and 78(2AAC)(a) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
[NAME]
19 May 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5231652 3
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 for the payment of less than $1000 • a final order to undertake work worth 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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5231652 4
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's claim that the tenant had not mowed the lawn recently was accepted.
- The tenant is responsible for maintaining the lawn under the tenancy agreement.
- The tenant was properly served notice of the hearing.
- The hearing proceeded without the tenant because they did not answer calls and did not request a delay.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The tenant was ordered to either mow the lawn or pay $250 to the landlord.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about the tenant's failure to maintain the lawn as agreed.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the tenant must either complete the lawn mowing or pay the landlord $250, based on the tenant's obligation to maintain the premises under their agreement.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, specifically sections 40(1)(a)-(e) and 78(1)(e), were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was the tenant's failure to maintain the lawn as required by their agreement.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the landlord, who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure they maintain the premises as required by their agreement to avoid such orders.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The judgment does not specify the exact evidence or documents used.