The rubbish had marked and stained the walls and likely damaged and caused deterioration to the carpet.
Tribunal adjudicator Theo Baker ordered the tenant to get rid of the rubbish, vacuum his room and clean all surfaces.
The tenant was also ordered to pay the $28 filing fee to the landlord.
The tenant and landlord were granted name suppression.
The landlord initially served the tenant with a 14-day remedy notice, with an extension granted over a weekend to allow the work to be completed.
But when the room was still unclean, the landlord applied to the tribunal claiming the tenant was in breach of the tenancy agreement and the Residential Tenancies Act because of the rubbish.
The room-by-room tenancy was in a three-bedroom apartment, and the landlord told the tribunal the condition and smell of the tenant’s room were making it harder to get a new tenant.
The smell from the room had spread into the flat’s common areas and the foyer area of the level.
The rubbish blocked the floor, creating a potential fire hazard.
The tenant told the tribunal he was finding it difficult to clear the rubbish and was experiencing a mental block.
“It is strongly recommended that the tenant gets some help with cleaning his room,” Baker said.
“There are organisations who can provide a non-judgmental service.”
If the tribunal finds the tenant has failed to comply with an obligation under the Residential Tenancies Act, it can make an order for the landlord to do the work.
If a work order was not made by consent of both parties, the tribunal must also make a monetary order as an alternative to compliance with the work order.
The landlord did not seek a monetary order alternative.
The tenant agreed he must clean his room, so Baker treated the claim as a consent order and did not impose a monetary amount.
Tenant risks losing tenancy
A work order may also authorise the landlord to undertake the work and charge the tenant the costs, if the tenant fails to comply with the work order and alternative monetary order.
A monetary limit must be imposed by the tribunal on the costs that can be charged, however, the landlord was reluctant for this to happen.
Baker also considered whether a conditional termination order should be made, but the landlord did not seek termination in their application.
“Termination was not mentioned in the notice of hearing that went to the parties. Therefore, I do not have the power to order a conditional termination at present,” Baker said.
“I also record that the tenant is in serious danger of losing his tenancy.
“If he does not meet his obligations, and the landlord follows the correct steps, it is not certain, but very likely that the tribunal would terminate on an application for termination.
“I encourage the tenant to seek help.”
Brianna McIlraith is a Queenstown-based reporter for Open Justice covering courts in the lower South Island. She has been a journalist since 2018 and has had a strong interest in business and financial journalism.
Join the NZ Herald’s Open Justice team for Case by Case, a video and podcast series examining the disputes and decisions making headlines across New Zealand.