Tenant Ordered to Pay $2,855.39 for Damages and Cleaning
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal ruled that the tenant must pay the landlord $2,855.39 for damages and cleaning costs. The tenant left the premises unreasonably dirty and damaged, requiring repairs.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is responsible for leaving the premises reasonably clean and for any necessary repairs or replacements.
📖 What the law says
This section states that a tenant must keep the rented property reasonably clean and tidy. When moving out, the tenant must leave the property in a reasonably clean and tidy condition and remove all rubbish.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The Tenancy Tribunal ordered the tenant to pay the landlord $2,855.39 for damages and cleaning costs.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal ordered the tenant to pay the landlord $2,855.39 for damages and cleaning costs incurred at the end of the tenancy. The tenant failed to leave the premises reasonably clean and made several repairs necessary.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4923761 1
[2025] NZTT 4923761
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT AUCKLAND | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA KI TĀMAKI MAKAURAU
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. [NAME] must pay [COMPANY] As Agent For [NAME] $2,855.39 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
Description Landlord Tenant Rubbish removal $191.00 Curtain replacement $129.00 Lock replacement 50% $48.75 Cleaning $80.00 Repairs $3,000.00 Filing fee reimbursement $20.44 Less balance of bond $613.80 Total award $3,469.19 $613.80 Net award $2,855.39 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord $2,855.39
Reasons:
1. Both parties attended the hearing.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4923761 2
2. The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the balance of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?
3. 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.
4. The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean, and a small amount of cleaning was required. I refer to the range hood, stove hob and some cupboards.
5. The landlord has claimed for rubbish removal. There is a recycling bin full of rubbish that is not for recycling. The tenant denies that the bin belonged to this property. The bin is at the property on 16 May 2024. Given that evidence it is entirely acceptable for the landlord to consider that the bin was rubbish from the tenant.
6. The landlord also claims for removing an orange bin which should have been collected by the company that provided it. The orange bin was at the property on 16 May 2024 and removed by the landlord on 22 May 2024. The tenant said that the company had advised her that they removed the bin on 23 May 2024. Given that the bin had not been removed by 22 May 2024 the landlord is entitled to be reimbursed for its removal.
7. The landlord claimed for removal of green waste. The photograph in support of this claim is of a small amount of leaves at the premises on 16 May 2024. I note from the report dated 21 May 2023 that some of the leaves have been removed and some remain. The invoice claimed is for green waste charged based on weight. I do not accept that the small number of leaves are significant enough to warrant a trailer and the weight of waste claimed. That claim is dismissed.
8. The landlord claims for replacement of a curtain in the lounge due to stains. That claim is awarded.
9. The landlord claims for repair of a door handle. The tenant said that the door handle was broken in 2022 when it locked and had to be removed by the tenant to gain access. The tenant said that they removed the lock because of this and had advised the property manager at the time. Given that the tenant removed the lock I have awarded the landlord half of the amount claimed given that this was an issue raised by the tenant two years earlier.
Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4923761 3
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 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.
12. 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.
13. 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.
14. 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.
15. 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.
16. The following damage was caused during the tenancy: lounge wall holes, lounge door damage, bedroom one wall holes, bedroom 4 wall holes, dining room wall hole, kitchen windowsill paint damage, hallway hole. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
17. The landlord sought costs of $5,335.00 which included plaster repairs, paint repairs, building repairs and materials. On the evidence produced I am not satisfied that the amount of damage justifies this award. There is evidence of one large wall hole, six small wall holes, marks from the dining table against the wall, a series of nail holes in one bedroom, a missing door handle and damage to the paint on the kitchen windowsill. I am told that some entire walls needed to be repainted but that is not necessarily due to damage alone and will include damage due to fair wear and tear which the tenant is not responsible for. On the evidence produced I award $3,000.00 for repairs.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4923761 4
18. Some of the bond had previously been released to the landlord to cover rent arrears, water rates and carpet cleaning. The balance of the bond is $613.80 which is applied to reduce the compensation awarded to the landlord.
19. [COMPANY] As Agent For [NAME] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.
[NAME]
03 March 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4923761 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 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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4923761 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:
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy at the end of the tenancy.
- The landlord is entitled to reimbursement for removing a recycling bin full of non-recyclable rubbish left by the tenant.
- The landlord is entitled to reimbursement for removing an orange bin that should have been collected by the company providing it.
- The tenant is responsible for replacing a stained curtain in the lounge.
- The tenant is liable for the cost of repairing damages to the walls and doors, which exceed fair wear and tear.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The landlord's claim for removing green waste was dismissed as the small amount of leaves was not significant enough to warrant the claimed charges.
- The landlord's request for the full cost of repairs ($5,335.00) was reduced to $3,000.00 based on the extent of the damage observed.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The tenant must pay the landlord $2,855.39 for damages and cleaning costs.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about the condition of the premises at the end of the tenancy and the responsibility for damages and cleaning.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the tenant was responsible for leaving the premises reasonably clean and for making necessary repairs, based on the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, sections 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) and 49B 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 made several repairs necessary.
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 reasonably clean and in good condition at the end of the tenancy.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence of the condition of the premises and the need for repairs mattered in the decision.