Tenant Ordered to Pay for Damages and Non-Compliance
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal ordered the tenant to pay the landlord $1,753.99 for leaving the premises unclean, failing to remove rubbish, and causing intentional damage to the property, including window repairs, kitchen benchtop repairs, and wall holes.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant must compensate the landlord for leaving the premises unclean, failing to remove rubbish, and causing intentional damage to the property.
📖 What the law says
This rule states that a tenant must keep the rented property reasonably clean and tidy. When the tenancy ends, the tenant must leave the property in a reasonably clean and tidy state 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 for various damages and non-compliance with tenancy obligations.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal ordered the tenant to pay the landlord $1,753.99 for leaving the premises unclean, failing to remove rubbish, and causing intentional damage to the property, including window repairs, kitchen benchtop repairs, and wall holes.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5123108 1
[2025] NZTT 5123108
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT REMOTE LOCATION | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: Unit/[ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. [NAME] must pay [COMPANY] For [NAME] $1,753.99 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
Description Landlord Tenant Cleaning $362.25 Rubbish removal $369.30 Repairs: Window $148.94 Repairs: Walls $142.50 Repairs: Kitchen bench $207.00 Lock/key replacement $297.00 Eviction $200.00 Filing fee reimbursement $27.00 Total award $1,753.99 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord $1,753.99
Reasons:
1. The landlord attended the hearing by video. The Tenant did not attend by video and the telephone number provided did not belong to the Tenant.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5123108 2
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. The tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
4. The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and did not remove all rubbish. Photographs and an exit inspection report were provided of the property which showed it required cleaning of the kitchen, bedroom sills, oven, floors, window sills and heatpump. An invoice was provided to substantiate the costs.
5. The Tenant also did not remove the rubbish. Photographs were provided rubbish outside and inside the house which included full rubbish bins, books, damaged household belongings, furniture, and utensils. An invoice was provided for the rubbish.
6. The tenant did not return the keys for the front and back door. The Landlord provided an invoice for the locksmith.
7. The amounts ordered are proved.
Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?
8. 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.
9. Where the damage is careless, and occurs after 27 August 2019, section 49B RTA applies. If the landlord becomes aware of the damage after 27 August, the damage is presumed to have occurred after that date unless the tenant proves otherwise.
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.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5123108 3
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 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: window repairs, damaged benchtop repair and wall holes.
15. Window pane- The backdoor window pane was broken during the tenancy and photographs were provided of the ingoing inspection report and outgoing inspection report. The Tenants told the Landlord, they would fix it and this never happened. The Landlord provided an invoice to repair the crack and photographs of the damaged door. The amounts ordered are proved.
16. Kitchen benchtop -The Landlord claimed for damage to the kitchen wooden benchtop caused intentionally by the Tenant smoking. The Landlord’s insurance excess was $1400.00 so they opted to claim from the Tenant instead. They submitted this was intentional damage. The Tenant had burnt a few holes on the bench and claimed this was caused by a candle falling on the bench. The Landlord noticed an ashtray in the property during one inspection which led them to believe the Tenant was smoking inside the property. The benchtop was perhaps as old as the property which the Landlord estimated to be built in the 1970’s. Ingoing photographs, photographs of the damage and an invoice was provided. I accept this damage was intentional.
17. In considering depreciation however, a benchtop has a lifespan of 12-18 years and this bench top would have exceeded its useful life span. The Landlord cannot be placed in a better position than before the damage incurred. I also note the ingoing inspection report refers to the benchtop as having scratches and marks. The invoice for repair refers to the benchtop condition as being “old”. For this reason, I find it appropriate to Order 15% of the replacement cost instead being $207.00. The amount ordered is proved.
18. Wall holes- The Landlord claimed for damage to the hallway wall and master bedroom caused during the tenancy. They submitted this was caused during the tenancy when the Tenant accidentally hit one wall and his brother had
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5123108 4
accidentally knocked the other. The Tenant acknowledged causing this damage and promised to repair it before they vacated. Ingoing inspection reports, outgoing inspection reports and an invoice was provided to substantiate the claims.
19. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.
20. The amounts ordered are proved.
21. The landlord claimed the eviction fee which was required because the Tenant did not vacate the property. An eviction notice was provided to support this claim.
22. The amounts ordered are proved.
23. As [COMPANY] For [NAME] has been substantially successful with the claim the Tenant must reimburse the filing fee.
[NAME] 15 April 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5123108 5
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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5123108 6
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 from the property.
- The tenant intentionally damaged the kitchen wooden benchtop by smoking.
- The tenant caused damage to the hallway wall and master bedroom walls.
- The tenant did not return the keys for the front and back doors.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The tenant claimed the damage to the kitchen benchtop was caused by a candle falling, but this was not believed by the court.
- The tenant did not provide evidence to disprove liability for the damages.
- The tenant did not vacate the property as agreed, leading to an eviction fee.
- The tenant did not attend the hearing by video or respond to the summons.
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 $1,753.99 for leaving the premises unclean, failing to remove rubbish, and causing intentional damage to the property.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about the tenant's failure to comply with end-of-tenancy obligations and causing intentional damage to the property.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the tenant must compensate the landlord for leaving the premises unclean, failing to remove rubbish, and causing intentional damage to the property because these actions violated the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Which laws or rules were applied?
Residential Tenancies Act 1986, s 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986, s 40(1)(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986, s 49B
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the tenant failed to comply with the end-of-tenancy obligations and caused intentional damage to the property, violating the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
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 they must ensure compliance with end-of-tenancy obligations and avoid causing intentional damage to the property to avoid financial penalties.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Photographs and invoices for cleaning, rubbish removal, and repairs were provided as evidence.