Tenant Ordered to Pay $3,991.10 for Damages and Cleaning
📌 In brief
In a recent Tenancy Tribunal case, a tenant was ordered to pay $3,991.10 to the landlord for damages and cleaning costs. The ruling emphasised the tenant's responsibility for maintaining the property and addressing any damages beyond normal wear and tear.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is liable for damages beyond fair wear and tear, including cleaning costs and repairs.
📖 Technical summary
The Tenancy Tribunal ordered the tenant to pay the landlord for various damages and cleaning costs.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal at Whangarei ruled that the tenant must pay the landlord $3,991.10 for various damages and cleaning costs incurred during the tenancy. The decision was based on the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, section 54, which outlines the responsibilities of tenants regarding property maintenance and damages.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5048172 1
[2025] NZTT 5048172
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT WHANGAREI | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA KI WHANGĀREI-TERENGA-PARĀOA
APPLICANT: [redacted] [COMPANY]
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. [NAME] and [NAME] must pay [NAME] as trustees of the [COMPANY] $3,991.10 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
Description Landlord Tenant Cleaning $669.32 Repairs: Replace broken cat door $89.98 Replace vanities $715.11 Replace bathroom door $119.75 Replace vinyl in kitchen and bathroom $1,124.67 Carpet Cleaning $123.47 Carpet replacement $2,200.00 Replace putty in front door $51.80 Remove writing from exterior $210.00 Damage to exterior $550.00 Rubbish removal $210.00 Filing fee reimbursement $27.00 Bond released to landlord $2,100.00 Total award $6,091.10 $2,100.00 Net award $3,991.10 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord $3,991.10
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5048172 2
Reasons:
Background
1. The tenancy began on 5 June 2021 and ended on 17 July 2024.
2. The landlord’s application seeks repairs, cleaning, rubbish removal, and replacement of chattels.
3. The hearing took place in Whangarei on 9 May 2024. [NAME], and [NAME] participated in the hearing.
Cleaning, minor repairs to walls, and rubbish removal
4. Tenants must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and remove all rubbish at the end of the tenancy.1
5. Tenants are liable for careless or intentional damage that occurs during the tenancy. Tenants are not liable for “fair wear and tear”.
6. This part of the landlord’s claim includes general cleaning and repair of small dents, marks, holes on walls and doors, removal of children’s writing on walls, and general cleaning.
7. [NAME] provided photographs showing the damage, and photographs in support of the cleaning claim. [NAME] carried out the repairs and cleaning.
8. [NAME]’s evidence shows that the premises were not left reasonably clean and tidy in some respects, in particular in the kitchen. There was damage to walls and doors beyond fair wear and tear.
9. The amount claimed for cleaning, repairs, and removal of rubbish is fair and reasonable.
Replacement of vanities
10. The claim seeks the cost of replacing both vanities due to water damage to the door and base on both both.
11. [NAME]’s photographs show the damage. The damage is not noted on the property inspection report at the beginning of the tenancy.
12. [NAME] commented that the water pressure on the taps is very strong, so it is easy for water to splash beyond the basin and onto the vanity.
13. I acknowledge that this helps explain how the damage occurred, but I do not think that it reduces the tenants’ liability for the damage. Tenants must exercise reasonable care. If the water pressure is strong, tenants should turn on the tap
1
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5048172 3
gently and slowly. If any water accidentally splashes onto the wooden vanity, tenants should wipe it away immediately.
14. The extent of damage to the vanities during this three-year tenancy shows a lack of reasonable care.
15. The vanities had to be replaced due to the extent of damage and the risk of mould / rot.
16. The cost claimed is based on the cost of basic, relatively low-cost vanities (cabinets only). The landlords provided quotes for these items.
17. The claim is proven.
Replacement of vinyl
18. [NAME]’s photographs show:
a. Coloured stains on the vinyl in the bathroom. Some of the stains are obvious rust / discolouration from the tenants’ washing machine. The other stains (pink and purple) are more difficult to identify.
b. A pink stain and a tear in the vinyl in the dining room.
19. This damage was not present at the start of the tenancy.
20. The damage is in the nature of careless damage.
21. The claim seeks $1,647.00 for replacement of the vinyl in both rooms.
22. I accept that the vinyl could not be “repaired”. The landlord attempted to remove the stains, but they are permanent. The only way to remediate the damage is to replace the vinyl.
23. The claim is proven.
24. Having regard to the age of the vinyl, I will apply depreciation of one-third to the proven replacement cost.
Carpet
25. The carpet was heavily stained during the tenancy.
26. [NAME] did not dispute that this damage occurred during this tenancy.
27. The landlord attempted to remediate the problem with commercial cleaning, but the stains, odour, and damage to the underlay could not be removed with commercial cleaning.
28. The carpet had to be replaced.
29. The cost of cleaning ($273.47) is proven. The tenants are liable for this cost.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5048172 4
30. The landlord was able to claim insurance for the carpet replacement, but the insurer applied an excess of $550 per room.
31. The cost of replacing the carpet, less depreciation, exceeds the $2,200.00 claimed by the landlord.
32. The tenants are liable to pay $2,200.00 for replacement of the carpet.
Other minor repairs
33. There was other damage to the premises during the tenancy as follows:
a. Putty in front door window. The tenants replaced a glass pane in the front door during the tenancy. It appears that the tenants children played with the window putty before it set. The putty needs to be replaced.
b. There is childrens writing / drawings on the exterior of the house. The amount claimed for removal is fair and reasonable.
c. There is damage to the bottom of part of the exterior cladding, near an outside tap. The landlords obtained a quote for $667.50 for repair. Given that the damage is near the bottom of the cladding, it is likely that the damage is careless damage, such as impact by a child’s bike or toy, rather than intentional damage. The claim is proven, but the tenant’s liability is limited to the amount of the landlord’s insurance excess.2
d. The main bathroom door and door frame were split. The damage is beyond fair wear and tear. The cost of replacing the door is proven.
Filing fee, bond
34. The landlord has been successful in this application, and I must also award the landlord the filing fee for the application.3
35. The bond was released to the landlord at the end of the tenancy, and it can be applied to the proven costs.
[NAME], 28 May 2025
2 Section 49B(3)(a) RTA 3 Section 102(4)(a) RTA
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5048172 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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5048172 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 tenants must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and remove all rubbish at the end of the tenancy.
- The tenants are liable for damages beyond fair wear and tear, including the need to replace damaged vanities.
- The tenants are responsible for the cost of replacing vinyl flooring that was stained and could not be repaired.
- The tenants must pay for the replacement of carpets that were heavily stained and could not be cleaned.
- The tenants are liable for the cost of removing children's writing from the exterior of the house.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The tenants are not liable for fair wear and tear, which the court distinguishes from damages caused by lack of reasonable care.
- The tenants' responsibility for the cost of repairs does not include the full amount claimed by the landlord if the damage is considered fair wear and tear.
- The tenants are not required to pay more than the landlord's insurance excess for certain types of damage, limiting their liability in those cases.
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 $3,991.10 for damages and cleaning costs.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about the tenant leaving the rental property in a state requiring extensive cleaning and repairs, including damaged vanities and vinyl flooring.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the tenant was responsible for the damages and cleaning costs because the condition of the property exceeded fair wear and tear.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, section 54, was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the damages and cleaning required went beyond normal wear and tear, making the tenant liable.
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?
For someone in a similar situation, it means they must ensure the property is left in a condition that does not exceed fair wear and tear to avoid financial penalties.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Photographs showing the extent of the damages and the condition of the property were crucial evidence.