Tenant Ordered to Pay $296.05 for Premises Damages
📌 In brief
In a recent Tenancy Tribunal case, a tenant was ordered to pay $296.05 from the bond to the landlord for damages to the premises. The judge ruled that the damage was more than fair wear and tear and was caused by the tenant.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is liable for damages to the premises if the landlord proves the damage occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear.
📖 What the law says
This rule states that a tenant has several responsibilities, including keeping the premises reasonably clean and tidy, notifying the landlord of any damage or needed repairs, and leaving the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy condition when moving out.
This rule makes a tenant responsible for the actions of anyone they allow into the premises, if those actions would have broken the tenancy agreement had the tenant done them. If someone intentionally or carelessly damages the premises while the tenant is there, it's assumed the tenant allowed that person to be there.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The claimant was ordered to pay the landlord $296.05 from the bond for damages to the premises.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal ordered the tenant to pay $296.05 from the bond to the landlord for damages to the premises. The judge found that the damage was more than fair wear and tear and was caused by the tenant.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4937019 1
[2025] NZTT 4937019
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT REMOTE LOCATION | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: Unit/Flat [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. [NAME] to pay [COMPANY] $296.05 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
2. The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $296.05 (3207116-024) to [COMPANY] immediately.
Description Landlord Tenant Repairs $296.05 Total award $296.05 Bond $296.05
Reasons:
1. The landlord attended the remote hearing on 29 April 2025 .
2. The tenant was contacted by telephone. The tenant said that she no longer wished to be involved in the hearing. I advised the tenant that the hearing would proceed in any event. The tenant said that she did not wish to be involved, and the call was terminated.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4937019 2
3. This matter had been part heard on 30 October 2024 and 4 February 2025.
4. The landlord has applied for compensation and refund of the bond following the end of the tenancy.
Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. 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. The landlord was not insured for tenant damage.
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. A brick wall at the front of the premises was damaged during the tenancy.
12. The landlord said that the damage had been caused by the tenant just prior to the end of the tenancy. The landlord said that the tenant had come onto the property with a trailer and had hit the wall, damaging the brickwork. The fence was damaged in two places. Outside the tenant's flat and the other on the end of the fence.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4937019 3
13. Prior to the first hearing of this matter before the Tribunal, the tenant carried out repairs to the fence. The repairs were carried out without the knowledge of the landlord. The landlord said that the work had not been carried out to an acceptable standard. The landlord provided a report from a builder which indicated that the costs to return the brick fence to its original condition would be $800.00. The landlord said that if her claim was proven before the Tribunal, she would be prepared to accept as compensation the remaining balance of the bond.
14. The tenant’s evidence at the previous hearing was that the work had been completed by the tenant and that the landlord had been happy with the work that had been carried out.
15. Having considered the evidence of the parties, I think it is more likely than not that the damage was caused by the tenant. The costs to return the landlord’s fence to its original pre damaged condition are as shown in the quote provided by [NAME]. In those circumstances, I am prepared to order, based on the landlords offer, compensation to the landlord of $296.05. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
16. The amounts ordered are proved.
S Young
29 April 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4937019 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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4937019 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 proved that damage to the brick wall occurred during the tenancy and was more than normal wear and tear.
- The tribunal found it more likely than not that the tenant caused the damage to the brick wall.
- The tenant did not successfully prove that she was not responsible for the damage.
- The landlord provided a builder's report detailing the cost to repair the brick fence to its original condition.
- The landlord was prepared to accept the remaining bond balance as compensation for the damage.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The tenant's claim that the landlord was happy with the repairs she carried out was not accepted.
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 $296.05 from the bond to the landlord for damages to the premises.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about whether the tenant was responsible for damages to the brick wall at the front of the premises.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the tenant was responsible for the damages because the landlord proved that the damage occurred during the tenancy and was more than fair wear and tear.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, sections 40(2)(a), 41, and 49B were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the landlord proved the damage was more than fair wear and tear and was caused by the tenant.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the tenant who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure that any damages to the premises are properly addressed and that they can provide evidence that the damage was not caused by themselves or anyone under their responsibility.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The evidence that mattered included the landlord's report from a builder indicating the costs to repair the damage and the tenant's previous statements about the repairs.