
Tenant horror stories
Most tenants are great. A few are absolute disasters. Here are the 5 worst tenant stories — and the lessons behind them 👇
Property Investment
3 min read
Author: Tiffany Bracey
Property Manager Team Leader at Opes Property Management Auckland.
Reviewed by: Jess Knight
Business Development Manager with over 3 years of experience in Property Management in Auckland.
You walk into your rental property after the tenants have moved out. The carpet’s a bit scuffed, there are marks on the walls, and the dishwasher door has a dent.
Naturally, your first thought might be: “The tenant should pay for this” ... but do they actually have to?
Because they don’t have to if it’s “fair wear and tear.”
In this article, you’ll learn what fair wear and tear is, who decides what counts, and how much you can charge your tenant when damage actually happens.
Fair wear and tear is hard to define exactly ... the law doesn’t say exactly what it is.
So there is a huge grey area between what counts as:
So it’s up to the Tenancy Tribunal to decide what counts as fair wear and tear, and we can tell what counts through the decisions the tribunal makes (that’s case law).
Here’s a basic breakdown:
Remember, it’s not about what you or your tenant think is fair – it’s what the Tenancy Tribunal decides.
When a case lands in front of the Tenancy Tribunal, these are the 6 things they consider:
High-traffic areas (like hallways or stairwells) are more prone to scuffs, worn carpet, or minor marks – and that’s generally accepted.
Fair wear and tear | Damage |
---|---|
A dent on the wall behind a couch | A hole punched through the hallway wall |
The longer someone lives in a property, the more natural wear you should expect.
Fair wear and tear | Damage |
---|---|
The paint on the walls has faded after a tenant lived there for 7 years | There are major scuffs on the wall after the tenant lived there for 7 months |
An old house will already be (somewhat) worn compared to a brand new house.
Fair wear and tear | Damage |
---|---|
Worn carpet in a 15-year-old home | Cracked benchtop in a brand-new kitchen |
The tribunal considers what was practical for the tenant to do.
Scrape marks on a wall from moving a mattress up narrow stairs?
That will likely to be ruled as fair – how else were they going to get their bed upstairs?
Dying grass in a backyard that doesn’t have a way to get the lawn mower out back (other than dragging it through the lounge): the tribunal might decide that’s not the tenant’s fault.
This unofficial industry rule of thumb helps property managers tell what does (and doesn’t) count as damage:
(Yes, we know … you’re holding your thumb and finger together now to picture the size of a $2 coin!)
Just because a tenant damages a dishwasher doesn’t mean they owe you the money to replace it.
Let’s say the tenant damages a 10-year-old dishwasher.
Its book value may be $0 (fully depreciated). That’s what your accountant says it’s worth.
In that case the tenant could smash it up and not have to pay you anything.
That’s because the tribunal doesn’t factor in “betterment”. So even though it costs you to replace the dishwasher, you don’t get anything because the appliance isn’t worth anything on paper.
In the example below, the curtains are coming away from the railing. Is that fair? Probably not.
In this case, it would be OK for a landlord to take some of the tenant’s bond to cover the damage.
What about this tenant’s paint job in the pic below?
It looks like they marked the wall and tried to cover it up. That would not be considered fair wear and tear, so the landlord could probably take some of the bond to put it right.
Because this is such a grey area it’s worth talking about so tenants and landlords have a sense of when it’s fair to take some money out of a bond.
In the end, “fair” doesn’t mean what you think it means … it means what the tribunal says it means.
Property Manager Team Leader at Opes Property Management Auckland.
Tiffany is an experienced property manager who understands the importance of strong systems to deliver top-tier service. She is committed to staying ahead of the ever-changing compliance requirements under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.