How much money was awarded in case 4615269?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4615269?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4615269?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9485087-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 4615269?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4615269?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4615269?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9485087-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4615269 — Tenancy dispute

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4615269 about?

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

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details.
The tenant must remedy the breach of the tenancy agreement by removing all pets from the property by Friday 20 October 2023.
The hearing is adjourned.
A further 60 minutes should be allowed for the next hearing of this matter, scheduled before me at this court on the next available date.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing today.
The landlord has applied for termination for breach of the tenancy agreement, which does not allow pets. The landlord also sought orders requiring the tenant to remove their pets and to remove rubbish from the garden. The tenancy agreement provides that the tenant must keep the lawns and gardens free from rubbish and papers. The landlord has served several notices to remedy these matters.
The landlord presented methamphetamine screening test results from 9 October 2018 and 28 August 2023. The second test identified a low level of contamination, said to be consistent with “minor consumption” that might be “historic in nature”.
The landlord had not applied for termination of the tenancy for unlawful use of the premises and so this issue has been adjourned. The application is varied to include an application for termination for breach of section 40(2)(b) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (use of premises for unlawful purpose). I anticipate the landlord will need to serve a notice to remedy otherwise the Tribunal may not have jurisdiction. Removal of pets and rubbish
The tenant accepted that she has 2 cats and a dog. The landlord had understood the dog was to be at the property temporarily, being looked after on behalf of another family member.
The tenant presented a letter from her GP noting that she is a single mother with 3 children. Her elderly mother also lives with them. The GP stated that the dog acts as security and provides therapy for their mental health challenges. The GP says that if the tenant and her children lose their pets, she would be “very concerned” for their mental wellbeing. I also understand that there have been issues concerning family violence at the property and the Police have been involved.
The landlord said several properties are under the same ownership down this particular street. The tenancies are all strictly no pets, and it would not be fair for one tenant to have pets while the others do not. The owner is unwilling to consider a “pet clause” or other appropriate limitation on the way pets are kept (e.g., a requirement for the dog to live outside).
In my view, there is no legal right to have a pet in a residential tenancy. Perhaps there should be, but it is not a matter addressed by the Residential Tenancies Act 1986. I have considerable sympathy for the tenant and do not like having to make an order for removal of the family’s pets in these circumstances. However, the tenant signed a contract which included a provision prohibiting pets and the landlord is entitled to enforce that provision.
As to the rubbish shown outside in the landlord’s inspection photographs dated 28 August 2023, the extent of the rubbish does not justify a termination order. In any event, the tenant says a skip bin was delivered and the rubbish has now been removed. The landlord can conduct an inspection to satisfy themselves of this if so required. I make no order about rubbish removal.
The next hearing will consider termination of the tenancy for failure to remove the pets (if this order is not complied with) and termination for alleged use of the property for an unlawful purpose (i.e., possession or use of illegal drugs). Filing fee and name suppression
I will address reimbursement of the filing fee ($20.44) at the conclusion of the proceeding.
The tenant requested name suppression. This order has referred to matters of a highly personal nature from the tenant’s perspective. I exercise my discretion to grant name suppression pursuant to section 95A(4) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Order

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

The tenant must remedy the breach of the tenancy agreement by removing all pets from the property by Friday 20 October 2023.

The hearing is adjourned.

A further 60 minutes should be allowed for the next hearing of this matter, scheduled before me at this court on the next available date.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing today.

The landlord has applied for termination for breach of the tenancy agreement, which does not allow pets. The landlord also sought orders requiring the tenant to remove their pets and to remove rubbish from the garden. The tenancy agreement provides that the tenant must keep the lawns and gardens free from rubbish and papers. The landlord has served several notices to remedy these matters.

The landlord presented methamphetamine screening test results from 9 October 2018 and 28 August 2023. The second test identified a low level of contamination, said to be consistent with “minor consumption” that might be “historic in nature”.

The landlord had not applied for termination of the tenancy for unlawful use of the premises and so this issue has been adjourned. The application is varied to include an application for termination for breach of section 40(2)(b) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (use of premises for unlawful purpose). I anticipate the landlord will need to serve a notice to remedy otherwise the Tribunal may not have jurisdiction. Removal of pets and rubbish

The tenant accepted that she has 2 cats and a dog. The landlord had understood the dog was to be at the property temporarily, being looked after on behalf of another family member.

The tenant presented a letter from her GP noting that she is a single mother with 3 children. Her elderly mother also lives with them. The GP stated that the dog acts as security and provides therapy for their mental health challenges. The GP says that if the tenant and her children lose their pets, she would be “very concerned” for their mental wellbeing. I also understand that there have been issues concerning family violence at the property and the Police have been involved.

The landlord said several properties are under the same ownership down this particular street. The tenancies are all strictly no pets, and it would not be fair for one tenant to have pets while the others do not. The owner is unwilling to consider a “pet clause” or other appropriate limitation on the way pets are kept (e.g., a requirement for the dog to live outside).

In my view, there is no legal right to have a pet in a residential tenancy. Perhaps there should be, but it is not a matter addressed by the Residential Tenancies Act 1986. I have considerable sympathy for the tenant and do not like having to make an order for removal of the family’s pets in these circumstances. However, the tenant signed a contract which included a provision prohibiting pets and the landlord is entitled to enforce that provision.

As to the rubbish shown outside in the landlord’s inspection photographs dated 28 August 2023, the extent of the rubbish does not justify a termination order. In any event, the tenant says a skip bin was delivered and the rubbish has now been removed. The landlord can conduct an inspection to satisfy themselves of this if so required. I make no order about rubbish removal.

The next hearing will consider termination of the tenancy for failure to remove the pets (if this order is not complied with) and termination for alleged use of the property for an unlawful purpose (i.e., possession or use of illegal drugs). Filing fee and name suppression

I will address reimbursement of the filing fee ($20.44) at the conclusion of the proceeding.

The tenant requested name suppression. This order has referred to matters of a highly personal nature from the tenant’s perspective. I exercise my discretion to grant name suppression pursuant to section 95A(4) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4615269 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 4615269 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions