Tenant Ordered to Pay $1,750.33 for Damages and Cleaning
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal ordered the tenant to pay the landlord $1,750.33 for damages and cleaning costs after determining that the tenant left the rental property unreasonably dirty and damaged beyond normal wear and tear.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is liable for leaving the premises unreasonably dirty and damaged beyond fair wear and tear.
📖 What the law says
This section outlines a tenant's responsibilities, including keeping the rental property reasonably clean and tidy. It also requires tenants to leave the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy condition and remove all rubbish when the tenancy ends.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal ordered the tenant to pay the landlord $1,750.33 for damages and cleaning costs.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal ordered the tenant to pay the landlord $1,750.33 for damages and cleaning costs after finding that the tenant left the premises unreasonably dirty and damaged beyond fair wear and tear.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5119308 1
[2025] NZTT 5119308
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT REMOTE LOCATION | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. [NAME] must pay [COMPANY] $1,750.33 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
2. The [COMPANY] is to pay the bond of $276.00 (3343800-004) to [COMPANY] immediately.
Description Landlord Tenant Rent credit $63.86 Rubbish removal $863.89 Cleaning $551.80 Oven/stove cleaning $115.00 Window repairs: Door $360.00 Lock/key replacement $172.50 Filing fee reimbursement $27.00 Total award $2,090.19 $63.86 Net award $2,026.33 Bond $276.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord $1,750.33
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5119308 2
Reasons:
1. The landlord attended the hearing, conducted via teleconference. Two calls to the tenant were attempted but neither succeeded. I was satisfied adequate service had completed and I continued with the hearing after the second call.
2. The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
3. A rent credit of $63.86 was advised and it has been applied against the debt in this order.
Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?
4. 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.
5. The landlord claims the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, including the oven, and did not remove all rubbish. In support of the claims, the landlord provided a series of photos that evidenced the need, and invoices to establish the costs.
6. The tenant did not return the keys. A [NAME] invoice was provided and a part- charge contribution of $172.50 sought. This is awarded.
7. The amounts ordered are proved.
Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. 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.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5119308 3
11. A glass pane in the front door was broken and replaced by the landlord at a cost of $360.00.
12. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
13. The amount ordered is proved by an invoice and evidenced by a photograph of the broken glass.
Filing fee
14. [COMPANY] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
M Brennan
26 March 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5119308 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 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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5119308 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 provided photos showing the need for cleaning and repair.
- The landlord showed invoices for the costs of cleaning and repairs.
- The tenant did not return the keys as required at the end of the tenancy.
- The broken glass in the front door was proven to be more than fair wear and tear.
- The landlord's claim for the filing fee was fully supported and awarded.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The tenant did not attend the hearing to dispute the claims.
- The tenant did not provide any evidence to disprove liability for the damages.
- The tenant did not show that the damage was due to fair wear and tear.
- The tenant did not demonstrate that the damage was covered by the landlord's insurance.
- The tenant did not return the premises in a reasonable state of cleanliness and tidiness.
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 pay the landlord $1,750.33 for damages and cleaning costs.
What was the dispute about?
The landlord claimed the tenant left the rental property unreasonably dirty and damaged beyond fair wear and tear.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided in favour of the landlord because the tenant failed to leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and the damages were beyond fair wear and tear.
Which laws or rules were applied?
Sections 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) and 49B(3)(a) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and the damages were beyond fair wear and tear.
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 that the rental property is left reasonably clean and tidy at the end of the tenancy to avoid liability for damages.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Photos of the damages and invoices for cleaning and repair costs were presented as evidence.