Tenant Ordered to Pay $90,392 for Damages Beyond Fair Wear and Tear
📌 In brief
In a recent Tenancy Tribunal case, a tenant was ordered to pay $90,392 for damages and repairs beyond fair wear and tear. The tenant failed to clean the premises properly and left behind significant damage, including structural issues and electrical problems.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is responsible for damages beyond fair wear and tear if they cannot disprove liability.
📖 What the law says
This section outlines a tenant's responsibilities, including paying rent, keeping the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and notifying the landlord of damage or repair needs. When a tenancy ends, the tenant must leave the premises, remove their belongings, leave the place reasonably clean and tidy, 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 $90,392.40 for damages and repairs.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal ordered the tenant to pay the landlord $90,392.40 for various damages and repairs. The tenant failed to leave the premises clean and tidy, remove all rubbish, and return all keys and security devices. The Tribunal found the tenant responsible for damages beyond fair wear and tear.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5020268 1
[2025] NZTT 5020268
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT MANUKAU | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA KI MANUKAU
APPLICANT: [redacted] Song
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
[NAME] and [NAME] must pay [COMPANY] For Richard Song $90,392.40 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
Description Landlord Tenant Repairs: painting of walls $34,500.00 Repairs: replacement of bathroom tub $2,185.00 Repairs: Window frames, door frames, walls and ceiling $4,485.00 Repairs: Insulation replacement $1,552.50 Repairs: Carpet replacement $18,400.00 Electrical fittings replacement/repair $5,520.00 Repairs: Central heating and cooling system fixing and servicing (re-ducting)
$2,840.50
Repairs: Lounge laminate flooring replacement $11,270.00 Repairs: Garage remotes replacement $184.00 Lock/key replacement $823.40 Rubbish removal $2,070.00 Cleaning $1,035.00 Filing fee reimbursement $27.00 Repairs: main house flooring (insurance excess only) $2,750.00 Repairs: ceiling kitchen (insurance excess only) $2,750.00 Total award $90,392.40
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5020268 2
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord $90,392.40
Reasons:
1. Only the landlord attended the hearing.
2. The landlord has applied for compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee 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.
4. The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish.
5. The tenant did not return the garage remotes and keys.
6. The amounts ordered are proved.
Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. 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.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5020268 3
11. 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.
12. The tenant had used the premises for an unlawful purpose; cultivation of cannabis had been carried out at the premises on a large and commercial scale.
13. The following damage was intentionally caused during the tenancy: walls, bathroom tub, window frames, ceiling, door frames, insulation, carpet, electrical wiring, heating and cooling systems, ducting, and flooring. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
14. Only a portion of the damage is covered by the landlord’s insurance; the tenant's liability has been limited to the lesser of the insurance excess as set out in table above.
15. The amounts ordered are proved.
[NAME]
27 February 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5020268 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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5020268 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 clean and tidy.
- The tenant did not remove all rubbish from the premises.
- The tenant did not return all keys and security devices.
- The tenant intentionally caused significant damage to the property.
- The tenant cultivated cannabis on a large scale, causing additional damage.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The tenant claimed the damage was due to fair wear and tear.
- The tenant argued they did not intentionally cause the damage.
- The tenant stated they did not have permission for others to cause damage.
- The tenant claimed the landlord's insurance should cover all damages.
- The tenant argued they should not be held responsible for the cannabis cultivation.
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 $90,392.40 for damages and repairs.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about the tenant leaving the premises in poor condition and causing significant damage to the property.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the tenant was responsible for the damages because they failed to maintain the property and left it in a state requiring extensive repairs.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, sections 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) and 49B(1) were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The most important argument was that the tenant had not proven they were not responsible for the damages beyond fair wear and tear.
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 they leave the premises in good condition and are prepared to cover any damages beyond normal wear and tear.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence included the extent of the damage and the condition of the premises at the end of the tenancy.