What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4697369 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Craig Wagener at Unit/Flat 24, 207B Buckland Road, Mangere

How much money was awarded in case 4697369?

Alarm Reset X 3: $772.80 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $264.71 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Security Guard X 2: $432.40 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4697369?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4697369?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9651972-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4697369 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Craig Wagener at Unit/Flat 24, 207B Buckland Road, Mangere

How much money was awarded in case 4697369?

Alarm Reset X 3: $772.80 awarded to landlord; Cleaning: $264.71 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Security Guard X 2: $432.40 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4697369?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4697369?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9651972-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit/Flat 24, 207B Buckland Road, Mangere East, Auckland Tenancy Tribunal Case 4697369 — Cleanliness

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4697369 — net $1,490.35 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Alarm reset x 3	$772.80	Alarm reset x 3
Cleaning	$264.71	Cleaning
Security guard x 2	$432.40	Security guard x 2
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,490.35
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,490.35

Both parties attended the hearing by telephone.

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

The landlord states that the anti-social behaviour is a domestic disturbance, swearing and offensive communication with staff employed by the landlord, the tenant’s girlfriend accessing the premises without permission where she has slept in the hallway, physical altercations between the tenant and his girlfriend resulting in blood in common areas and setting off the security alarm on three separate occasions when not required.

Subject to certain considerations, the Tribunal must make an order terminating the tenancy if it is satisfied: a. on 3 separate occasions within a 90-day period the tenant, or a person in the premises with the tenant’s permission, engaged in anti-social behaviour in connection with the tenancy; and b. on each occasion the landlord gave the tenant written notice— i. describing clearly which specific behaviour was considered to be anti-social and (if known to the landlord) who engaged in it; and ii. advising the tenant of the date, approximate time, and location of the behaviour; and iii. stating how many other notices (if any) the landlord has given the tenant under this paragraph in connection with the same tenancy and the same 90-day period; and iv. advising the tenant of the tenant’s right to make an application to the Tribunal challenging the notice and; c. the landlord’s application to the Tribunal was made within 28 days after the landlord gave the third notice.

The Act confirms that antisocial behaviour includes harassment or any act (whether intentional or not) that reasonably causes alarm, distress or nuisance that is more than minor.

I have taken into account the evidence presented by the parties as set out above.

I have determined that the landlord has established that anti-social behaviour has occurred on the premises by the tenant or a person on the tenancy with the tenant’s permission. The landlord has served notices on the tenant as required in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, and the application to the Tribunal was made within 28 days of the date of the third notice.

I consider it would not be unfair to terminate the tenancy taking into account the circumstances in which the behaviour arose and the notices were given. I cannot see that the landlord has acted in any retaliatory way in bringing this application.

I cannot consider the impact on the tenant, in making an order for termination of the tenancy.

The landlord has also claimed for costs associated with the anti-social behaviour. This cost is related to the security alarms being activated on three separate occasions and having to be re-set. Another cost was for cleaning following the physical altercation between the tenant and his girlfriend where blood needed to be cleaned from common areas. The other cost related to the need to employ static security guards following domestic incidents.

On the evidence I consider that the tenant should be liable for these costs which resulted either from the tenant’s actions or the actions of someone at the premises with his permission.

Because [The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4697369 — net $1,490.35 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Alarm reset x 3	$772.80	Alarm reset x 3
Cleaning	$264.71	Cleaning
Security guard x 2	$432.40	Security guard x 2
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,490.35
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,490.35

Order

The tenancy of Craig Wagener at Unit/Flat 24, 207B Buckland Road, Mangere East, Auckland 2024 is terminated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing by telephone.
The landlord has applied to the Tribunal for an order terminating the periodic tenancy on the grounds of anti-social behaviour from the tenant or someone on the premises with the tenant’s permission.
The landlord states that the anti-social behaviour is a domestic disturbance, swearing and offensive communication with staff employed by the landlord, the tenant’s girlfriend accessing the premises without permission where she has slept in the hallway, physical altercations between the tenant and his girlfriend resulting in blood in common areas and setting off the security alarm on three separate occasions when not required.
Subject to certain considerations, the Tribunal must make an order terminating the tenancy if it is satisfied: a. on 3 separate occasions within a 90-day period the tenant, or a person in the premises with the tenant’s permission, engaged in anti-social behaviour in connection with the tenancy; and b. on each occasion the landlord gave the tenant written notice— i. describing clearly which specific behaviour was considered to be anti-social and (if known to the landlord) who engaged in it; and ii. advising the tenant of the date, approximate time, and location of the behaviour; and iii. stating how many other notices (if any) the landlord has given the tenant under this paragraph in connection with the same tenancy and the same 90-day period; and iv. advising the tenant of the tenant’s right to make an application to the Tribunal challenging the notice and; c. the landlord’s application to the Tribunal was made within 28 days after the landlord gave the third notice.
The Act confirms that antisocial behaviour includes harassment or any act (whether intentional or not) that reasonably causes alarm, distress or nuisance that is more than minor.
I have taken into account the evidence presented by the parties as set out above.
I have determined that the landlord has established that anti-social behaviour has occurred on the premises by the tenant or a person on the tenancy with the tenant’s permission. The landlord has served notices on the tenant as required in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, and the application to the Tribunal was made within 28 days of the date of the third notice.
I consider it would not be unfair to terminate the tenancy taking into account the circumstances in which the behaviour arose and the notices were given. I cannot see that the landlord has acted in any retaliatory way in bringing this application.
I cannot consider the impact on the tenant, in making an order for termination of the tenancy.
The landlord has also claimed for costs associated with the anti-social behaviour. This cost is related to the security alarms being activated on three separate occasions and having to be re-set. Another cost was for cleaning following the physical altercation between the tenant and his girlfriend where blood needed to be cleaned from common areas. The other cost related to the need to employ static security guards following domestic incidents.
On the evidence I consider that the tenant should be liable for these costs which resulted either from the tenant’s actions or the actions of someone at the premises with his permission.
Because [The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4697369 — Cleanliness at Unit/Flat 24, 207B Buckland Road, Mangere East, Auckland

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4697369 — Cleanliness at Unit/Flat 24, 207B Buckland Road, Mangere East, Auckland

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Key findings

Frequently asked questions