Tenant Ordered to Pay for Cleaning and Rubbish Removal Costs After Dispute

OUTCOME: Allowed

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5371461 1

[2026] NZTT 5371461

TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT REMOTE LOCATION | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA

APPLICANT: [redacted]

Landlord

RESPONDENT: [redacted]

Tenant

TENANCY ADDRESS: 3 Leybourne Circle, Glen Innes, Auckland 1072

ORDER

1. [RESPONDENT] must pay [APPELLANT] $1,666.40 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

2. [COMPANY] is to pay the bond of $138.00 (3044171-006) to [APPELLANT] [COMPANY] immediately.

Description Landlord Tenant Payment received on 15 October 2025 $135.01 Rubbish removal $1,417.80 Cleaning: the whole house $493.61 Filing fee reimbursement $28.00 Total award $1,939.41 $135.01 Net award $1,804.40 Bond $138.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord $1,666.40

Reasons:

Introduction

1. The hearing was conducted by video conference.

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5371461 2

2. [NAME] attended on behalf of the landlord. When the hearing commenced Ms [RESPONDENT] was not present. I attempted to contact her by telephone and was unable to reach her. I left a voicemail advising that I would attempt to call her again in approximately 10 minutes and that if I remained unable to contact her I would proceed in her absence.

3. I successfully contacted Ms [RESPONDENT] on my second attempt and she joined the hearing.

4. The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

The hearing

5. From the outset Ms [RESPONDENT] strongly disputed the landlord's claim. Her position was that she was not responsible for any of the costs sought. She maintained that the property had been broken into on multiple occasions and that rubbish had been dumped at the premises by [NAME]. She repeatedly stated that she was not prepared to pay for damage or rubbish she said had been caused by others.

6. Ms [RESPONDENT] also complained about the condition of the premises during the tenancy. She said the property suffered from leaking walls, that it was not clean when she moved in and that the landlord had failed to adequately address issues she had raised during the tenancy. She further expressed dissatisfaction about what she considered to be a lack of assistance from the landlord when she reported concerns for her personal safety and requested assistance with relocation.

7. [NAME] rejected those allegations. He said the claim before me was limited to cleaning and rubbish removal costs and did not include any claim for ordinary wear and tear. He said the property had been inspected by him on 2 April 2025 while Ms [RESPONDENT] was still residing there. He recalled that the spa pool and tyres later left at the property were present at that inspection and that Ms [RESPONDENT] herself discussed those items with him at the time.

8. Mr [NAME] said that when the tenancy ultimately ended, substantial rubbish remained throughout the property, including rubbish around the house, beneath the house and within two sheds. He also said the interior of the property required cleaning before it could be re-let. He produced photographs showing the condition of the premises after the tenancy ended and explained that the landlord incurred costs of $1,417.80 for rubbish removal and $493.61 for cleaning.

9. Throughout the hearing Ms [RESPONDENT] repeatedly interrupted both Mr [RESPONDENT] and me while questions were being asked and answered. I directed her on several occasions to allow Mr [NAME] to complete his evidence and advised her that she

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5371461 3

would have an opportunity to respond. Despite those directions the interruptions continued.

10. I warned Ms [RESPONDENT] that if she continued interrupting the proceedings I would remove her from the hearing. Shortly thereafter she chose to leave the hearing herself and did not return. The later part of the hearing therefore proceeded in her absence.

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

11. 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.

12. The landlord relies principally on photographs taken after possession was returned, the evidence of Mr [NAME], the cleaning and rubbish removal invoices, and the inspection information relating to the tenancy.

13. Mr [RESPONDENT] explained that although Ms [RESPONDENT] later claimed the property had been effectively vacant for some time before the keys were returned, the landlord was not in possession of the premises and could not conduct a final inspection until the tenancy was formally concluded and the keys were returned. Mr [RESPONDENT] also gave evidence that he was unaware that Ms [RESPONDENT] had vacated the premises.

Mr [RESPONDENT] evidence concerning the vacation of the premises

14. Mr [NAME] said he had conducted a routine tenancy inspection on 2 April 2025. He explained that the inspection had originally been scheduled for 26 December 2024. However, because the inspection date fell during the Christmas and New Year holiday period, and following discussions with Ms [RESPONDENT], the inspection was deferred and rescheduled to 2 April 2025.

15. [NAME] said Ms [RESPONDENT] attended the inspection and walked through the property with him. He recalled discussing a number of issues she had raised concerning the property, particularly her concerns about the carpets. He said that because a considerable amount of time was spent discussing those matters, he inadvertently failed to take photographs during the inspection. However, he retained a written record of the inspection.

16. Mr [NAME] said that at the time of the inspection the property was generally in a reasonably clean and tidy condition. Although there were concerns relating to the carpets, he said the condition of the property overall did not give any indication that Ms [RESPONDENT] had permanently vacated the premises. He also recalled that a spa pool and several tyres were present on the property at that

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5371461 4

time and that Ms [RESPONDENT] was aware of those items. Indeed, he said she joked about continuing to use the spa during the winter months.

17. Mr [NAME] said he was therefore surprised when, some time after the inspection, Ms [RESPONDENT] advised that she was no longer residing at the property. He said that prior to that advice he had no reason to believe the premises had been abandoned or vacated. To the contrary, Ms [RESPONDENT] had attended the April 2025 inspection in person and had actively engaged with him regarding issues at the property.

18. Mr [RESPONDENT] said that communication with Ms [RESPONDENT] thereafter was sporadic. She had previously contacted the landlord expressing concerns about her personal safety and indicating that people were attempting to locate her. He said he advised her to contact Police and make an application for a housing transfer. According to [NAME], Ms [RESPONDENT] later advised she had found alternative accommodation and intended to move elsewhere.

19. However, Mr [RESPONDENT] said that although Ms [RESPONDENT] later maintained the property had effectively been vacant for a considerable period, the landlord was not aware that she had ceased residing there. He explained that the tenancy remained in her name, the keys had not been returned and possession had not been surrendered. As a result, the landlord was unable to conduct a final inspection or take control of the premises.

20. Mr [NAME] estimated that approximately two months had elapsed between the time Ms [RESPONDENT] indicated she was no longer residing at the property and the eventual return of the keys. He said the landlord even waived the usual notice requirements in an attempt to assist Ms [RESPONDENT]'s relocation. Nevertheless, the keys were not returned promptly and the tenancy could not be formally concluded until much later.

21. Mr [RESPONDENT] said that once the keys were finally returned, the landlord arranged for a vacant possession inspection on 4 June 2025. It was during that inspection that the photographs now before the Tribunal were taken and the extent of the cleaning and rubbish removal required became apparent.

Analysis

22. Section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(iv) of the Act requires a tenant to leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy at the end of the tenancy, to remove all rubbish from the premises, and to return all keys to the landlord.

23. The landlord bears the burden of establishing that those obligations were not met. Having considered the evidence before me, I am satisfied the landlord has discharged that burden.

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5371461 5

24. The photographs taken following the return of possession show substantial rubbish remaining at the property, including rubbish around the exterior of the premises, beneath the house and within two sheds. The photographs also demonstrate that cleaning was required before the property could be returned to a condition suitable for reletting.

25. The principal issue raised by Ms [RESPONDENT] was that she should not be held responsible for those costs because the property had allegedly been broken into on several occasions and rubbish had been dumped at the premises by [NAME].

26. I do not accept that submission.

27. Although Ms [RESPONDENT] strongly disputed liability, she did not produce any evidence to support her assertions. No photographs, police reports, witness statements, or other material were provided to substantiate her claim that [NAME] were responsible for the rubbish left at the property. While Ms [RESPONDENT] indicated during the earlier proceedings on 12 March 2026, which were adjourned to give her an opportunity to prepare and submit evidence, that she intended to rely on photographs, no such evidence was provided.

28. I accept Mr [NAME] evidence regarding the timeline of events leading to the end of the tenancy. Mr [NAME] conducted an inspection of the premises on 2 April 2025. That inspection had originally been scheduled for 26 December 2024 but was postponed due to the Christmas and New Year holiday period and rescheduled for a later date. Ms [RESPONDENT] attended the April inspection. Mr [RESPONDENT] evidence was that the property was generally in a reasonable condition at that time apart from concerns Ms [RESPONDENT] raised regarding the carpet. He also recalled that the spa pool and tyres later requiring removal were already present at the property during that inspection.

29. The April inspection is significant because it occurred only a short period before the tenancy ended. It demonstrates that Ms [RESPONDENT] remained actively involved with the tenancy at that time. I accept Mr [NAME] evidence that he had no reason to believe the property had been abandoned or vacated when that inspection occurred.

30. I also accept Mr [RESPONDENT] evidence that the landlord was not aware that Ms [RESPONDENT] had ceased residing at the property until considerably later. Although Ms [RESPONDENT] subsequently asserted that the property had effectively been vacant for some time, the tenancy remained in her name, the keys had not been returned and possession had not been surrendered. The landlord was therefore unable to conduct a final inspection or take possession of the premises.

31. Mr [RESPONDENT] explained that communication with Ms [RESPONDENT] became sporadic after she raised concerns regarding her personal safety and indicated that she wished to relocate. He said the landlord waived the usual notice requirements to

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5371461 6

assist her move. Nevertheless, the keys were not returned promptly and the tenancy was not formally concluded until some time later.

32. Even if I were to accept that Ms [RESPONDENT] was absent from the property for periods before the tenancy formally ended, responsibility for the condition of the premises remained with her until possession was returned to the landlord. See section 41 of the Act. The evidence does not establish that the landlord assumed responsibility for the premises during that period.

33. I also accept Mr [NAME] evidence that a number of the larger items later requiring removal, including the spa pool and tyres, were present during the April 2025 inspection while Ms [RESPONDENT] remained the tenant in occupation. That evidence is inconsistent with Ms [RESPONDENT]'s assertion that all of the rubbish was deposited by [NAME] after she had left.

34. In assessing the evidence, I found Mr [NAME] to be a credible and reliable witness. His evidence was supported by the photographs and documents before me. By contrast, Ms [RESPONDENT]'s evidence consisted largely of self-serving statements unsupported by independent evidence.

35. I therefore prefer the evidence of Mr [NAME] where there is a conflict between the parties.

36. Taking all of the evidence together, I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the premises were not left reasonably clean and tidy at the end of the tenancy, that rubbish remained at the property, and that the landlord incurred the claimed cleaning and rubbish removal costs as a direct consequence.

Conclusion

37. I find that Ms [RESPONDENT] failed to comply with her obligations under s 40 of the Act by failing to leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and by failing to remove rubbish from the property at the end of the tenancy.

38. I reject Ms [RESPONDENT]'s contention that the landlord should bear responsibility for the condition in which the premises were left. The evidence does not support a finding that the rubbish removal and cleaning costs were caused by the actions of [NAME] or by any act or omission of the landlord. Even if it does, Ms [RESPONDENT] remains liable under s 41 of the Act

39. I am satisfied that the landlord reasonably incurred cleaning costs of $493.61 and rubbish removal costs of $1,417.80, a total of $1,911.41. After crediting the payment of $135.01 received from Ms [RESPONDENT] on 15 October 2025, the balance owing is $1,776.40.

40. Accordingly, the landlord’s application for compensation is granted. The amounts ordered are proved.

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5371461 7

Filing fee

41. [APPELLANT] has wholly succeeded with the claim, I must reimburse the filing fee.

M Kan

03 June 2026

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5371461 8

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, or the failure to make an order, where the amount in dispute on appeal is

less than $1000 • a final order to undertake work, or the failure to make an order, where the value of the

work in dispute on appeal is 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/

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5371461 9

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: