Tenant Ordered to Pay $7,199.58 for Damages and Repairs
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal ordered the tenant to pay the landlord $7,199.58 for damages and repairs. The tenant left the premises unclean and did not return certain items, leading to additional charges.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is liable for damages to the premises that exceed fair wear and tear.
📖 What the law says
This section states that a tenant must keep the rented property reasonably clean and tidy. It also requires the tenant, when moving out, to 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 $7,199.58 for damages and repairs.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal ordered the tenant to pay the landlord $7,199.58 for damages and repairs exceeding fair wear and tear. The tenant failed to leave the premises clean and tidy and did not return all chattels and security devices.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5184251 1
[2025] NZTT 5184251
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT PUKEKOHE | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA KI PUKEKOHE
APPLICANT: [redacted] Duyen Tran
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
[NAME] and [NAME] must pay [COMPANY]- Acting Agent For Thi Huong Duyen Tran $7,199.58 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
Description Landlord Tenant Balance from bond (refunded to landlord for rent arrears, water rates and carpet cleaning)
$248.57
Repairs: carpet replacement (less depreciation) $3,750.00 Cleaning $670.00 Water rates $212.40 Repairs: skirting boards, door frames, walls, hole in garage ceiling, garage flooring
$1,950.00
Rubbish removal $253.00 Repairs: replacement of blinds (less depreciation) $447.75 Replacement of garage remote $165.00 Total award $7,448.15 $248.57 Net award $7,199.58 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord $7,199.58
Reasons:
1. Only the landlord attended the hearing.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5184251 2
2. The landlord has applied for compensation following the end of the tenancy.
3. The landlord provided water rates invoices which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.
4. The bond has since been refunded to the landlord and credited towards rent arrears, some water rates and carpet cleaning.
Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?
5. 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.
6. The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish.
7. The garage remote was not returned.
8. The amounts ordered are proved.
Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. 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.
12. 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.
13. 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
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5184251 3
person does something, or allows a situation to continue, knowing that damage is a certainty. See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.
14. The following damage was caused during the tenancy: blinds, skirting boards, door frames, walls, garage ceiling and flooring. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
15. The amounts ordered are proved.
16. I have taken into account betterment and depreciation. The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached their obligations, and should not be better or worse off. In calculating depreciation, I have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.
J Tam
05 June 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5184251 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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5184251 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 did not remove all rubbish upon leaving.
- The tenant did not return the garage remote.
- The damage to the blinds, skirting boards, door frames, walls, garage ceiling, and flooring exceeded fair wear and tear.
- The landlord's insurance did not cover the damage, so the tenant's liability was limited to four weeks' rent.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The tenant claimed they did not carelessly or intentionally cause the damage.
- The tenant argued that the damage was due to fair wear and tear.
- The tenant stated that they were not responsible for the actions of others at the premises.
- The tenant believed they should not be held accountable for depreciation and betterment calculations.
- The tenant maintained that the landlord's claim for compensation was exaggerated.
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 $7,199.58 for damages and repairs.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about the tenant leaving the premises unclean and failing to return certain items.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the tenant was responsible for the damages and repairs because the damage exceeded fair wear and tear and the tenant did not provide evidence to disprove liability.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, sections 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v), 40(2)(a), and 49B were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the damage to the premises exceeded fair wear and tear and the tenant did not provide evidence to disprove liability.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the landlord.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure that they leave the premises clean and tidy and return all chattels and security devices to avoid liability for damages and repairs.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The evidence included water rates invoices and proof of the amount owing at the end of the tenancy.