What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4689389 about?

The tribunal order states: The landlord’s application for termination of the tenancy is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4689389?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4689389?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4689389?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9524559-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4689389 about?

The tribunal order states: The landlord’s application for termination of the tenancy is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4689389?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4689389?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4689389?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9524559-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit/Flat 3, 2B Home Street, Grey Lynn, Auckland 1021 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4689389 — 14-day notice

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

The landlord has applied to the Tribunal for an order terminating the tenancy on the grounds of anti-social behaviour from the tenant or someone on the premises with the tenant’s permission.

This tenancy however is a fixed term tenancy and section 55A(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (‘RTA’) only permits a landlord under a periodic tenancy to apply to the Tribunal for an order terminating the tenancy on the ground of anti- social behaviour.

In the alternative, the landlord applies for termination for breach of the tenant’s obligations pursuant to section 56 RTA.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

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) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Where the breach is capable of remedy the landlord must first serve a notice on the tenant requiring them to remedy the breach within at least 14 days and establish that the tenant has failed to do so.

The landlord adduced evidence to show that the tenant has breached their obligations by disturbing the peace and quiet enjoyment of the neighbours, excessive loud music at night, abusing the neighbours and a guest of the tenant having urinated in the garden.

The landlord served a 14-day notice on the tenant on 15 September 2023 but did not give the tenant any opportunity to remedy any of the breaches before filing the application to the Tribunal to terminate the tenancy. The landlord filed this application on 19 September, well prior to the expiry of the 14-day notice.

The tenant appears to have remedied the previous breaches by not making noise or disturbing the neighbours.

There is no direct evidence before me that the breaches complained by the landlord in its letter of 15 September 2023 have not been remedied.

The tenant assured the landlord that those complaints have been abated and promised to keep the peace in the neighbourhood.

For those reasons, it would not be inequitable to refuse to make an order to terminate the tenancy. The landlord’s application therefore fails on this occasion.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

The landlord has applied to the Tribunal for an order terminating the tenancy on the grounds of anti-social behaviour from the tenant or someone on the premises with the tenant’s permission.

In the alternative, the landlord applies for termination for breach of the tenant’s obligations pursuant to section 56 RTA.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

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) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

The tenant appears to have remedied the previous breaches by not making noise or disturbing the neighbours.

There is no direct evidence before me that the breaches complained by the landlord in its letter of 15 September 2023 have not been remedied.

The tenant assured the landlord that those complaints have been abated and promised to keep the peace in the neighbourhood.

For those reasons, it would not be inequitable to refuse to make an order to terminate the tenancy. The landlord’s application therefore fails on this occasion.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4689389 — 14-day notice at Unit/Flat 3, 2B Home Street, Grey Lynn, Auckland 1021

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4689389 — 14-day notice at Unit/Flat 3, 2B Home Street, Grey Lynn, Auckland 1021

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions