Tenant Ordered to Pay $5,125 for Damages at End of Tenancy
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal ordered the tenant to pay the landlord $5,125.97 for various damages and non-compliance at the end of the tenancy. The tenant left the property filthy, with significant rubbish and damage to the premises.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is required to leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, remove all rubbish, and compensate for any damage beyond fair wear and tear.
📖 What the law says
This section states that a tenant must keep the rented property reasonably clean and tidy during the tenancy. It also requires the tenant, when moving out, to leave the property in a reasonably clean and tidy condition and to remove all their rubbish.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The Tenancy Tribunal ordered the tenant to pay the landlord $5,125.97 for various damages and non-compliance at the end of the tenancy.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal ordered the tenant to pay the landlord $5,125.97 for various damages and non-compliance at the end of the tenancy, including cleaning costs, rubbish removal, and window repairs. The tenant failed to leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and caused damage beyond fair wear and tear.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5103511 1
[2025] NZTT 5103511
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT REMOTE LOCATION | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. [NAME] must pay Team Group Rentals Limited As Agent For [NAME] $5,125.97 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
2. This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 24 February 2025 under the same proceedings.
Description Landlord Tenant Previous order application 5103511 dated 24/02/2025 $1,421.29 Replace furnishings: heat pump remote $159.85 Cleaning $850.00 Rubbish removal: and lawn mow $811.51 Window repairs (5) $1,283.32 Repairs: painting 2 walls $600.00 Total award $5,125.97 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord $5,125.97
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5103511 2
Reasons:
1. The landlord attended the hearing represented by [NAME].
2. [NAME] did not attend the hearing and did not answer the calls made to his phone (number ending 0402) during the hearing. He had been notified of the hearing by email and text, accordingly pursuant to section 92 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) the hearing continued in his absence.
3. The landlord’s claims were first heard on 24 February 2025. At that time only the claim for rent arrears had been served on the tenant. Accordingly, an order for rent arrears was made and the claims for compensation were adjourned to a further hearing to ensure the tenant had been adequately notified. He now has been.
4. The initial order for rent arrears is included in this one for debt recovery purposes.
Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?
5. The landlord seeks cleaning costs, rubbish removal costs and costs to mow the garden.
6. Pursuant to section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) of the RTA 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.
7. The landlord established in evidence tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and did not remove all rubbish. There was a significant amount of rubbish left including an old spa pool and building debris totalling two trailer loads. The property had not been cleaned at all and was filthy. The curtains also had to be washed as they smelt of smoke. It appeared that the tenant had smoked inside despite the agreement prohibiting such.
8. Some light bulbs were missing, and the heat pump needed to be replaced because one of the springs had been pulled out and it no longer worked. The landlord had not been notified of any issue with the remote.
9. The amounts ordered are proven in evidence and considered reasonable in the circumstances.
Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?
10. The landlord also seeks compensation for having to paint two walls that had been damaged by the tenant and replace 5 broken glass windows. The tenant had stuck mirror stickers on the wall in one bedroom and stickers on another bedroom wall which when removed, damaged the paint.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5103511 3
11. To be successful in such a claim, 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.
12. The landlord has established that the damage occurred during the tenancy, and I am satisfied it was all in excess of fair wear and tear. It would have been clear when applying these stickers to the walls that they could only be removed at cost to the paintwork. There was therefore an element of carelessness involved. The landlord has attempted to mitigate loss by only painting the two walls that were damaged and being careful to remove the stickers.
13. The number of windows broken also indicates a level of carelessness and one had been taped up and yet the landlord had not been notified.
14. Accordingly, I find the amounts ordered proven in evidence.
K Lash
16 May 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5103511 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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5103511 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 tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy.
- The tenant left a significant amount of rubbish, including an old spa pool and building debris.
- The tenant caused damage to the walls by sticking and removing mirror stickers carelessly.
- Five windows were broken during the tenancy, indicating carelessness.
- The landlord attempted to mitigate losses by only repainting the damaged walls.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The tenant did not notify the landlord about issues with the remote control for the heat pump.
- The tenant did not provide evidence that the damage was due to fair wear and tear.
- The tenant did not prove that they did not carelessly or intentionally cause the damage to the walls and windows.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tenancy Tribunal ordered the tenant to pay the landlord $5,125.97 for various damages and non-compliance at the end of the tenancy.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about the tenant's failure to leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and the damage caused to the property at the end of the tenancy.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the tenant must pay the landlord for the damages and non-compliance because the tenant did not leave the premises clean and tidy and caused damage beyond fair wear and tear.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, sections 40(1)(e) and 40(2)(a) were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and compensate for any damage beyond fair wear and tear.
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 they leave the premises clean and tidy and do not cause unnecessary damage at the end of the tenancy.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The evidence included the state of the property at the end of the tenancy, including the amount of rubbish left and the condition of the premises.
