VadeLab
AllowedTenancy Tribunal·

Tenant Ordered to Pay $2,875 in Vacated Costs After Moving Out

Case No. [2026] NZTT 5454843

📌 In brief

A tenant was ordered by the Tenancy Tribunal to pay $2,875 for cleaning and repairs after leaving their rental property in a messy state with rubbish and damaged items. The decision is based on the Residential Tenancies Act which requires tenants to leave properties clean and tidy.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is responsible for leaving premises reasonably clean, removing all rubbish, and replacing worn-out smoke alarm batteries during their tenancy.

📖 What the law says

Residential Tenancies Act 1986 s.40

This section states that a tenant must keep the rented property reasonably clean and tidy during their tenancy. It also requires the tenant, when moving out, to leave the property in a reasonably clean and tidy condition and to remove all rubbish.

Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.

📖 Technical summary

The claimant successfully recovered costs for vacated cleaning and repairs from the respondent.

📜 Headnote Official document

The claimant successfully recovered vacated costs from the respondent for cleaning and repairs after the tenant left the property in an untidy condition. The decision is based on the Residential Tenancies Act, which outlines tenants' obligations to leave premises clean and tidy.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5454843 1

[2026] NZTT 5454843

TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT MANUKAU | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA KI MANUKAU

APPLICANT: [redacted]

Landlord

RESPONDENT: [redacted]

Tenant

TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

ORDER

1. [RESPONDENT] must pay [APPELLANT] and [NAME] $2,875.52 immediately for the vacated costs, as calculated and shown in table below.

Description Landlord Minus Rubbish removal: exterior $1,254.75 Cleaning $465.35 Rubbish removal $821.05 Cleaning kitchen cupboards $104.26 Clean rangehood $48.45 Rehang kitchen door $64.98 Repairs: patch up holes $200.80 Heat pump remote $53.34 Drawer repair $72.54 Total award $3,085.52 Minus Bond -$210.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord $2,875.52

2. The [COMPANY] is to pay the bond of $210.00 (6183015-009) to [NAME]– [APPELLANT] and [NAME] immediately.

Reasons:

1. The landlord attended the hearing, the tenant did not attend the hearing.

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5454843 2

2. The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond 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. The tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.

4. The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish.

5. The landlord provided to the Tribunal the pre let inspection report and detailed photographs and the exit inspection report and photos. The landlord also provided a detailed invoice for the repairs and associated vacated costs.

6. The report and photos show the property was not left reasonably clean and tidy, with an extensive array of discarded furniture, possessions and rubbish left throughout the exterior and interior of the property.

7. The heat pump remote was missing at the end of the tenancy, which the landlord had to replace.

8. The invoices provided are very reasonable and reflect solely the work needed to clean and remove rubbish to a reasonable standard. I am satisfied that the landlord has proven their claims for the cleaning, rubbish removal and heat pump replacement.

9. The amounts ordered are proved.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

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

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5454843 3

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. [NAME] v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.

16. The following damage was caused during the tenancy:

- Damaged kitchen drawer and door.

- Holes in the walls in bedroom 1 and 2 and the bathroom.

17. The landlord has provided the exit inspection to highlight the damage to the kitchen drawer and cupboard door, and the holes in the walls.

18. The invoice for the cost of the repairs is very reasonable.

19. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

20. I am satisfied the landlord has proven all their claims relating to the vacated cost for this tenancy.

21. The [COMPANY] is to refund the bond of $210.00 to the landlord to offset the debt owed by the tenant to the landlord.

J [APPELLANT]

08 June 2026

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5454843 4

Please read carefully: Visit justice.govt.nz/tribunals/tenancy/rehearing’s-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].

[NAME] 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/

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5454843 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:

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:

A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.

⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this

✅ Tends to be accepted

  • A tenant is responsible for leaving premises reasonably clean, removing all rubbish, and replacing worn-out smoke alarm batteries during their tenancy.

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 $2,875 for vacated costs after leaving the property untidy.

Who was involved?

A landlord and a tenant were involved in the dispute.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided based on evidence showing the property was left dirty with rubbish and damaged items. The tenant failed to meet their obligations under the Residential Tenancies Act.

Which laws or rules were applied?

Sections 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) and 40(1)(ca) of the Residential Tenancies Act were applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The landlord's evidence showing the property condition after vacating was critical in proving the tenant's liability.

Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?

The decision was for the claimant (landlord).

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Tenants must leave properties clean, remove all rubbish, and replace worn-out smoke alarm batteries during their tenancy.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Pre-let inspection report, exit inspection report with photos, detailed invoices for repairs were crucial.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, both parties can appeal the decision within 10 working days to the District Court.

Is it worth getting a lawyer for a case like this?

It is advisable to seek legal advice from a qualified lawyer for such cases.

Official source: Tenancy Tribunal headnote and full judgment reproduced from the court's public records. View on the official source ↗Summary, holding, technical summary and questions: produced by Artificial Intelligence based on the official headnote and judgment. These are VadeLab’s own material and are not the work of the Court.This decision was issued by the Tenancy Tribunal and is reproduced from its published records. VadeLab is not affiliated with, and this page is not endorsed by, that court or tribunal.