How much money was awarded in case 4480121?

Compensation: $500.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4480121?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4480121?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9058855-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 4480121?

Compensation: $500.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4480121?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4480121?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9058855-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4480121 — Tenancy dispute

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4480121 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

Tenantcheck Insights

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4480121 — net $520.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation	$500.00	Compensation
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$520.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$520.44

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.

Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities must pay [The tenant/s] $520.44 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:

The landlord agrees to compensate the tenant up to $1,230.00 for the cost to install an external security screen-door on the front door provided that:- a. The tenant supplies the landlord with the GST receipts for any costs he has incurred, and b. The door complies with, or can be made to comply with, the landlord’s health and safety requirements related to escape from fire.

Reasons

[The tenant/s] and Alex Kalnins for Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities attended hearings on 13 February 2023 and 8 May 2023.

[The tenant/s] claims the landlord has not taken all reasonable steps to ensure that none of the landlord’s other tenants causes or permits any interference with his reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy in the use of the premises. See s45(1)(e) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA). He has applied for [The tenant/s] compensation although says that his main concern is to feel safe and secure in his home.

This unit is in a block of 26 units, 18 of which are managed by the landlord.

The tenant has lived here since July 2019. His evidence is that since about Christmas 2021, there have been difficulties between him and an occupant (“X”) of a unit who lived in unit across the driveway from his. X is also a tenant of the landlord.

The first officially recorded complaints by the tenant to the landlord were in about August 2022. The tenant said that he had also previously verbally notified several different property managers who had visited the units, of verbal abuse and a previous assault by X prior to this date.

The landlord’s records show that the tenant has notified the landlord of: a. at least two assaults by X (26 December 2022 and 24 January 2023); b. a number of occasions of verbal abuse by X; c. water damage to his property caused by X intentionally spraying a hose into the tenant’s house in August 2022 and again on 20/21 February 2023.

The landlord’s records also show that X has complained about the tenant abusing him and videoing him.

The tenant and X have served Trespass Notices against the other and both have involved the police on occasion.

The landlord accepts that X did assault the tenant on 26 December 2022. I viewed a video of this incident during the hearing. It shows the tenant being punched several times by a neighbour whom both parties tell me is X. My decision:

I made a finding in my order dated 8 May 2023 that the landlord has not taken all reasonable steps to ensure that X did not cause interference with [The tenant/s] 's reasonable peace, comfort and privacy in his use of the premises.

The main reason for my decision is the delay in the landlord taking action after being notified by the tenant of the assault by X on 26 December 2022. It took thirteen days for the landlord to contact [The tenant/s] and a further eight days to meet with the tenant (on 16 January 2023). The landlord accepts that there was a failure in its notification processes and notes that this was the Christmas and New Year period when staff levels may be lower. I understand this however this was an allegation of an assault and so should have been followed up on promptly.

There was then further delay before the landlord issued X with a formal “Anti- social behaviour notice” on 25 January 2023. If the landlord has decided that this is the process it will use when there are incidents such as this, then this action should have been taken very soon after the assault – not a month later.

There is no evidence that the landlord issued a formal notice in regard to the assault on 24 January 2023. This would have been a reasonable step.

After the second reported assault (on 24 January 2023) the landlord agreed to install additional security features at [The tenant/s] 's unit (the work order was approved on 27 January 2023). These were new locks on doors and windows, new solid wood doors, and exterior security lights. These were reasonable steps given that matters had escalated. Unfortunately, there was some delay in having the work done. It was completed on about 8 March 2023. I consider this delay to also be a breach of s45(1)(e) RTA because of the escalation at this point.

The hose incident in August 2022 was managed appropriately by the landlord. Both X and [The tenant/s] were spoken to, and the landlord offered assistance to the tenant in regard to drying his belongings (he said that he had already made arrangements himself). The landlord also advised the tenant to make complaints to the police and to consider issuing a trespass notice. These are reasonable steps for the landlord to take.

The landlord’s records show that there were also reports that the tenant was threatening and abusing X. It is understandable that the landlord needed to try to ascertain what was happening and not favour one tenant over another. However, when matters escalated to assault then the landlord should have acted decisively.

The landlord reports that it has recognised that where there is a problem between neighbours, (regardless of whose “fault” it is) that it can be helpful to allocate a consistent tenancy manager rather than multiple different staff. I note that this would also allow staff who have more experience or expertise in conflict resolution, or relate well to the parties involved, to hopefully make better progress in resolving issues.

The tenant agrees that the allocation of a consistent property manager made a big difference in this case.

By the time of the second hearing, X has been relocated to another nearby home with the landlord. X does visit the complex at times but the tenant reports that, in the main, X does not harass him or cause problems. He says that his quality of life is much improved. Compensation

The tenant has applied for compensation. He has provided receipts for carpet cleaning after the hose incident that he said his flatmate paid for and for which he paid her back. This is for $373.80.

The landlord has also agreed to reimburse the tenant for the cost to install a security screen door and I have included this as an order.

The additional security features have cost the landlord about $3,800.00.

The purpose of compensation is to try to put the injured party back in the position they would have been in. I consider that the additional security features, relocating X, and agreeing to reimburse the cost of the screen door have largely done this. I award an additional $500.00 of compensation towards the cost of carpet cleaning and loss caused by the hose incident. Filing fee and suppression of name

The tenant has been substantially successful in the application and so I order reimbursement of the filing fee and suppression of his name, as applied for.

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4480121 — net $520.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation	$500.00	Compensation
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$520.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$520.44