Tenant ordered to pay damages for leaving premises unclean and causing significant damage
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal ruled that the tenant must pay $238.03 to the landlord for leaving the rental property unreasonably dirty and causing significant damage beyond normal wear and tear. The landlord was ordered to return the bond of $2,200.00.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is liable for leaving the premises unreasonably dirty and causing damage beyond fair wear and tear.
📖 What the law says
This section outlines a tenant's responsibilities, including keeping the rented property reasonably clean and tidy. It also states that when a tenancy ends, the tenant must leave the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy condition and remove all rubbish.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal ordered the tenant to pay damages and the landlord to return the bond.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal ordered the tenant to pay $238.03 to the landlord for leaving the premises unreasonably dirty and causing significant damage beyond fair wear and tear. The landlord was ordered to return the bond of $2,200.00.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5157711 1
[2025] NZTT 5157711
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT REMOTE LOCATION | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted] Ranamila
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. [NAME] must pay [COMPANY] As Agent For [COMPANY] $238.03 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
2. [COMPANY] is to pay the bond of $2,200.00 (6377412-009) to [COMPANY] As Agent For [COMPANY] immediately.
Description Landlord Tenant Rubbish removal $618.50 Light fittings $69.53 Window repairs $250.00 Repairs $1,500.00 Total award $2,438.03 Bond $2,200.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord $238.03
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5157711 2
Reasons:
1. The landlord attended the hearing by telephone. The tenant did not attend the hearing. Attempts were made to join the tenant to the hearing by telephone, but the calls went to voicemail.
2. I am satisfied that the tenants have notice of this hearing pursuant to section 91A(2)(e) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The hearing proceeded in the tenant’s absence.
3. The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, 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?
4. 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.
5. The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish.
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.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5157711 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 following damage was caused during the tenancy: missing light fittings, damaged walls, five broken windows, broken bathroom vanity. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
13. The landlord claimed for repairing and painting all walls and doors in the three bedrooms, hallway and lounge. It is not clear from the photographs produced that all walls and doors needed painting due to damage caused by the tenant. I note that there are marks on the walls from pen and things being stuck to the wall and ceiling but there is also some fair wear and tear.
14. There is an invoice amounting to $5,543.00 which is for the time to repair and paint the premises, remove the rubbish, and garden maintenance. The amount of time claimed exceeds that required to carry out the repairs attributable to the tenant. I have therefore reduced the invoice to $1,500.00 which also includes the consumables claimed for the painting and repairs. I have awarded separately for the cost of a skip bin and tip fees as well as repairs to the five windows.
15. [COMPANY] As Agent For [COMPANY] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. For the same reason I have suppressed the landlord’s name.
N Walker
14 April 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5157711 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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5157711 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 the tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish.
- The landlord proved that damage occurred during the tenancy and was more than fair wear and tear.
- The tenant did not attend the hearing, so the hearing proceeded in their absence.
- The amounts claimed by the landlord were proved to be correct.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The landlord's claim for repairing and painting all walls and doors was reduced because not all damage was clearly caused by the tenant.
- The amount of time claimed in the invoice for repairs and painting exceeded what was attributable to the tenant.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The tenant must pay $238.03 to the landlord for leaving the premises unreasonably dirty and causing significant damage beyond fair wear and tear. The landlord must return the bond of $2,200.00.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about the condition of the rental property at the end of the tenancy and the responsibility for the damages found inside the property.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the tenant was responsible for the damages and the unclean state of the property because the damage exceeded fair wear and tear and the tenant failed to leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, sections 40 and 49B were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the tenant left the premises unreasonably dirty and caused significant 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?
For someone in a similar situation, it means that they could be held responsible for leaving the rental property unreasonably dirty and causing significant damage beyond fair wear and tear.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The evidence included invoices for repairs and photographs showing the condition of the property.