Tenant Ordered to Pay $1,901.47 for Rent Arrears and Cleaning Costs
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal ruled that the tenant must pay the landlord $1,901.47 for unpaid rent and cleaning costs. This includes $1,800 for rent arrears and $74.47 for carpet cleaning. The tenant did not attend the hearing and had been properly notified.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant must return the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy state at the end of the tenancy.
📖 What the law says
This section states that a tenant must pay rent on time, use the property mainly for living, and keep it reasonably clean and tidy. It also requires the tenant to tell the landlord about any damage or needed repairs.
When a tenancy ends, this section requires the tenant to move out, take all their belongings, leave the property in a reasonably clean and tidy state, and remove all rubbish.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The Tenancy Tribunal awarded the landlord $1,901.47 for rent arrears and cleaning costs.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal awarded the landlord $1,901.47 for rent arrears and cleaning costs. The tenant failed to maintain the premises in a clean state at the end of the tenancy, as required by the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4937893 1
[2025] NZTT 4937893
TENANCY TRIBUNAL - Wellington | Te Whanganui-a-Tara
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. [NAME] and [NAME] must pay [NAME] and [NAME] $1,901.47 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
Description Landlord Tenant Rent arrears to 14 July 2024 $1,800.00 Carpet cleaning: rug doctor $74.47 Filing fee reimbursement $27.00 Total award $1,901.47 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord $1,901.47
Reasons:
1. The landlord attended the hearing and was represented by [NAME] tenants did not attend the hearing. They were properly served and sent reminders.
2. The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4937893 2
How much is owed for rent?
3. I find the tenancy ended on 14 July 2024. The landlord agreed the periodic tenancy would end without the tenants giving the usual notice. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.
Did the tenants comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?
4. Tenants must return the tenancy premises in a reasonably clean and tidy state. See section 40(1)(c) and (e)(iii) Residential Tenancies Act.
5. There is no scientific way to determine what is reasonably clean and tidy, and the Tribunal must evaluate the evidence available, and in particular inspection reports and photographs. The landlord said the tenants did clean but there was some debris on the carpets at the end of the tenancy, and there was a smell. They are claiming the cost of hiring a rug doctor.
6. The landlord provided me with photos of the carpets taken at the end of the tenancy. I accept there was debris on the carpet in some of the rooms. The landlord has the best evidence about smell because they were at the house after the tenancy ended, and I have heard no evidence from the tenants. The claim for the rug doctor is modest and the landlord has not even claimed the time for doing the cleaning. It seems most likely to me the house needed additional cleaning. The amount ordered is proved.
7. Because the landlord has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
[NAME]
20 February 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4937893 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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4937893 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 proved the amount of rent owing at the end of the tenancy with rent records.
- The landlord provided photos showing debris on the carpets at the end of the tenancy.
- The landlord's claim for carpet cleaning was modest and did not include time for cleaning.
- The landlord's testimony about a smell in the house after the tenancy ended was accepted.
- The tenants did not attend the hearing or provide any evidence to counter the landlord's claims.
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 $1,901.47 for rent arrears and cleaning costs.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about unpaid rent and the need for additional cleaning at the end of the tenancy.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided in favour of the landlord because the tenant did not provide evidence that the premises were left in a clean state.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, sections 40(1)(c) and 40(e)(iii) were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the tenant did not leave the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy state.
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 premises are left in a clean state at the end of the tenancy to avoid such costs.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Photos of the carpets taken at the end of the tenancy and the landlord's statement about the condition of the premises mattered.