What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4670489 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at [Tenancy address suppressed] is terminated,

How much money was awarded in case 4670489?

Ated, And Possession Is Granted To […: $20.44 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4670489?

The primary dispute was Healthy homes.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4670489?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9589937-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4670489 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at [Tenancy address suppressed] is terminated,

How much money was awarded in case 4670489?

Ated, And Possession Is Granted To […: $20.44 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4670489?

The primary dispute was Healthy homes.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4670489?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9589937-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4670489 — Healthy homes

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4670489. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
ated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at 11.59pm on 7 November 2023. 2. The tenant is to pay the landlord	$20.44		ated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at 11.59pm on 7 November 2023. 2. The tenant is to pay the landlord

Order

The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at [Tenancy address suppressed] is terminated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at 11.59pm on 7 November 2023.
The tenant is to pay the landlord’s filing fee of $20.44.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The tenant attended by teleconference. The landlord was represented by [The landlord’s representative]. [The support person/s] attended in support. [The interpreter/s] was also present to assist the Tribunal. Background
On 19 June 2023 the Tribunal issued a conditional termination order following an application by the landlord. The Tribunal held that the tenant had breached her obligations through the actions of her permitted guest in using methamphetamine on the premises. The Tribunal found that it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy given the high methamphetamine readings. However, the tenant was given the opportunity to clean the premises and was allowed until 4 July 2023 to do so. The landlord was to test the premises and if the results recorded methamphetamine at a level above 15μg/100cm 2 then the tenancy was to terminate after 7 days of the landlord notifying the tenant of the test results.
On 6 July 2023 the landlord tested the premises and the results showed lower levels of methamphetamine residue than previously recorded, with results for the kitchen and garage being less than 15μg per 100cm 2 . The tenant remained in the premises.
Further testing of the premises was undertaken on 22 August 2023. The Certificate of Analysis from [drug testing lab] showed results of 33.5 μg per 100cm 2 in the garage and 115 μg per 100cm 2 in the entry. The landlord gave notice to the tenant on 25 August 2023 to end the tenancy on 31 August 2023. The tenant remained in possession beyond this date and submitted an application to the Tribunal on 30 August 2023. The tenant’s application: 4670489
The tenant has applied to the Tribunal for cancellation of the notice given by the landlord to end the tenancy. She claims that the landlord’s testing for methamphetamine is flawed and that the results are incorrect.
The tenant states that she has arranged for an independent test, but has not provided the report. There is evidence of the booking for testing to be carried out on 30 August 2023 by Healthy Homes NZ. However, as at the date of the hearing, the results of this testing has not been provided. The tenant states that she had requested that the report be sent directly to the Tribunal. She does not have a copy of the report and has been unable to provide it. The landlord has also not received this report.
Having considered the reasons given, I find that the tenant has not established, with sufficient evidence, that the landlord’s testing for methamphetamine is flawed.
However, I also find that the landlord’s notice period to end the tenancy to be inadequate, since the date given for the ending of the tenancy is less than 7 days. In any event, the tenant has remained in possession beyond this date.
It is arguable that the landlord is no longer able to rely on the earlier Tribunal order, since the conditional termination order was to lapse if fully complied with. Following testing in July 2023, the landlord did not enforce the termination order. However, for the reasons set out below, I find that the grounds for termination of the tenancy have been established by the landlord. The landlord’s application: 4678291
The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the tenant’s obligations.
The Tribunal may terminate a tenancy for breach where, due to the nature or extent of the breach, it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate. See section 56(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the RTA).
Where the breach is not capable of remedy, the landlord is not required to serve a 14-day breach notice on the tenant. A breach is not capable of remedy where the thing done, or its effect, cannot be undone.
Use of the tenancy premises for an unlawful purpose, such as methamphetamine use, is a breach that is not capable of remedy. In these circumstances, the landlord is not expressly required to serve a 14-day breach notice on the tenant to remedy the breach.
In this case the landlord has provided evidence of the results of its methamphetamine testing. Testing undertaken on 22 August 2023, following analysis by [drug testing lab], showed results of 33.5μg/100cm 2 in the garage and 115μg/100cm 2 in the entry. These are above the levels considered to be safe. The current standard is that levels must be 15 μg/100cm 2 or below.
In the District Court decision of Full Circle Real Estate v Piper 1 Judge Kellar noted that where the concentration of methamphetamine exceeds any prescribed maximum acceptable level, there is “damage” to the premises in terms of s.40(2)(a) of the RTA because there is a risk to human health.
The landlord has also been concerned for the health and safety of the tenant and her children remaining on the premises, in view of the high levels of methamphetamine contamination found on testing. While the contamination may be the result of the actions of the tenant’s guest, ultimately, the tenant remains responsible, since tenants are liable for the actions of people at the premises with their permission 2 .
While acknowledging the challenging situation for the tenant, in view of the circumstances, it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy. Accordingly, this tenancy is terminated, with the tenancy coming to an end on 7 November 2023.
Even though this tenancy is to end, the landlord has indicated that it is willing to assist the tenant to find alternative accommodation. Filing fee and suppression
As the landlord has been successful, the tenant is to pay the landlord’s filing fee of $20.44. 1 [2019] NZDC 4947 2 See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B of the RTA
In view of the circumstances of this case, and by agreement of both parties, the landlord’s and tenant’s names are to be suppressed.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4670489. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
ated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at 11.59pm on 7 November 2023. 2. The tenant is to pay the landlord	$20.44		ated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at 11.59pm on 7 November 2023. 2. The tenant is to pay the landlord

Order

The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at [Tenancy address suppressed] is terminated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at 11.59pm on 7 November 2023.
The tenant is to pay the landlord’s filing fee of $20.44.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The tenant attended by teleconference. The landlord was represented by [The landlord’s representative]. [The support person/s] attended in support. [The interpreter/s] was also present to assist the Tribunal. Background
On 19 June 2023 the Tribunal issued a conditional termination order following an application by the landlord. The Tribunal held that the tenant had breached her obligations through the actions of her permitted guest in using methamphetamine on the premises. The Tribunal found that it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy given the high methamphetamine readings. However, the tenant was given the opportunity to clean the premises and was allowed until 4 July 2023 to do so. The landlord was to test the premises and if the results recorded methamphetamine at a level above 15μg/100cm 2 then the tenancy was to terminate after 7 days of the landlord notifying the tenant of the test results.
On 6 July 2023 the landlord tested the premises and the results showed lower levels of methamphetamine residue than previously recorded, with results for the kitchen and garage being less than 15μg per 100cm 2 . The tenant remained in the premises.
Further testing of the premises was undertaken on 22 August 2023. The Certificate of Analysis from [drug testing lab] showed results of 33.5 μg per 100cm 2 in the garage and 115 μg per 100cm 2 in the entry. The landlord gave notice to the tenant on 25 August 2023 to end the tenancy on 31 August 2023. The tenant remained in possession beyond this date and submitted an application to the Tribunal on 30 August 2023. The tenant’s application: 4670489
The tenant has applied to the Tribunal for cancellation of the notice given by the landlord to end the tenancy. She claims that the landlord’s testing for methamphetamine is flawed and that the results are incorrect.
The tenant states that she has arranged for an independent test, but has not provided the report. There is evidence of the booking for testing to be carried out on 30 August 2023 by Healthy Homes NZ. However, as at the date of the hearing, the results of this testing has not been provided. The tenant states that she had requested that the report be sent directly to the Tribunal. She does not have a copy of the report and has been unable to provide it. The landlord has also not received this report.
Having considered the reasons given, I find that the tenant has not established, with sufficient evidence, that the landlord’s testing for methamphetamine is flawed.
However, I also find that the landlord’s notice period to end the tenancy to be inadequate, since the date given for the ending of the tenancy is less than 7 days. In any event, the tenant has remained in possession beyond this date.
It is arguable that the landlord is no longer able to rely on the earlier Tribunal order, since the conditional termination order was to lapse if fully complied with. Following testing in July 2023, the landlord did not enforce the termination order. However, for the reasons set out below, I find that the grounds for termination of the tenancy have been established by the landlord. The landlord’s application: 4678291
The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the tenant’s obligations.
The Tribunal may terminate a tenancy for breach where, due to the nature or extent of the breach, it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate. See section 56(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the RTA).
Where the breach is not capable of remedy, the landlord is not required to serve a 14-day breach notice on the tenant. A breach is not capable of remedy where the thing done, or its effect, cannot be undone.
Use of the tenancy premises for an unlawful purpose, such as methamphetamine use, is a breach that is not capable of remedy. In these circumstances, the landlord is not expressly required to serve a 14-day breach notice on the tenant to remedy the breach.
In this case the landlord has provided evidence of the results of its methamphetamine testing. Testing undertaken on 22 August 2023, following analysis by [drug testing lab], showed results of 33.5μg/100cm 2 in the garage and 115μg/100cm 2 in the entry. These are above the levels considered to be safe. The current standard is that levels must be 15 μg/100cm 2 or below.
In the District Court decision of Full Circle Real Estate v Piper 1 Judge Kellar noted that where the concentration of methamphetamine exceeds any prescribed maximum acceptable level, there is “damage” to the premises in terms of s.40(2)(a) of the RTA because there is a risk to human health.
The landlord has also been concerned for the health and safety of the tenant and her children remaining on the premises, in view of the high levels of methamphetamine contamination found on testing. While the contamination may be the result of the actions of the tenant’s guest, ultimately, the tenant remains responsible, since tenants are liable for the actions of people at the premises with their permission 2 .
While acknowledging the challenging situation for the tenant, in view of the circumstances, it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy. Accordingly, this tenancy is terminated, with the tenancy coming to an end on 7 November 2023.
Even though this tenancy is to end, the landlord has indicated that it is willing to assist the tenant to find alternative accommodation. Filing fee and suppression
As the landlord has been successful, the tenant is to pay the landlord’s filing fee of $20.44. 1 [2019] NZDC 4947 2 See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B of the RTA
In view of the circumstances of this case, and by agreement of both parties, the landlord’s and tenant’s names are to be suppressed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4670489 — Healthy homes

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4670489 — Healthy homes

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions