What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4726051 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 4726051?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4726051?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4726051?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9736492-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4726051 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 4726051?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4726051?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4726051?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9736492-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4726051 — Harassment

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
The tenancy of Moses Pomale Mafua at [Tenancy address suppressed] is terminated immediately, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at 2pm 8 December 2023.
Moses Pomale Mafua must pay the filing fee of $20.44 to the landlord immediately.

Reasons

Only the landlord attended the hearing.
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 relevant anti-social behaviour is: (a) On 14 August 2023: Harassing [The landlord/s] staff over the phone abusing saying, ‘Smash your head’. Our staff has advised the support worker about this incident as well. Moses also advised that he is going away for Matua training and his sister will be staying. [The landlord/s] staff have advised Moses that this place is only for you as part of the tenancy agreement and no one else can stay instead of you. (b) On 26 October 2023, there were phone calls from neighbouring tenants about the tenant’s activities that day, recorded on the landlord’s notice as follows: Neighbouring Tenant 01 - He is smashing up the unit and banging on the wall throwing rubbish out of his unit onto the car park. Threatening tenants and praying in the rain. They claim he is on P and has mental health issues. The tenants at [Tenancy address suppressed] are scared of him and don’t want to come out because of him. Neighbouring Tenant 02 - Moses has banging on his walls. Smashed the glass in carpark. Threatening the neighbours. He threatened me personally. Rubbish outside his room. I saw mice there. I'm annoyed. I'm frightened to take my rubbish out too. Very annoyed tenant (c) On 27 October 2023, there was a further call from a neighbouring tenant, recorded as follows: Neighbouring Tenant – The tenant called up advising this tenant is out threatening with a knife and all the neighbouring tenants are scared for their lives and have called the Police on him. Police have been called to attend and take him away as he is not fit to live by himself.
These events were also witnessed by the landlord’s agent, [The landlord's agent], who verified that the tenant was seen waving a knife around and running between the units, threatening other tenants.
The landlord called the Police during the incident on 27 October and around 5 police cars attended. The tenant was taken away and has not occupied the premises since. It is unknown if he is in custody. His rent has been in arrears for 26 days. There are strong smells and many flies coming from his unit. Analysis
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 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 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 find that the landlord has established that anti-social behaviour has occurred on the premises by the tenant. 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.
Because [The landlord/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
The tenancy of Moses Pomale Mafua at [Tenancy address suppressed] is terminated immediately, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at 2pm 8 December 2023.
Moses Pomale Mafua must pay the filing fee of $20.44 to the landlord immediately.

Reasons

Only the landlord attended the hearing.
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 relevant anti-social behaviour is: (a) On 14 August 2023: Harassing [The landlord/s] staff over the phone abusing saying, ‘Smash your head’. Our staff has advised the support worker about this incident as well. Moses also advised that he is going away for Matua training and his sister will be staying. [The landlord/s] staff have advised Moses that this place is only for you as part of the tenancy agreement and no one else can stay instead of you. (b) On 26 October 2023, there were phone calls from neighbouring tenants about the tenant’s activities that day, recorded on the landlord’s notice as follows: Neighbouring Tenant 01 - He is smashing up the unit and banging on the wall throwing rubbish out of his unit onto the car park. Threatening tenants and praying in the rain. They claim he is on P and has mental health issues. The tenants at [Tenancy address suppressed] are scared of him and don’t want to come out because of him. Neighbouring Tenant 02 - Moses has banging on his walls. Smashed the glass in carpark. Threatening the neighbours. He threatened me personally. Rubbish outside his room. I saw mice there. I'm annoyed. I'm frightened to take my rubbish out too. Very annoyed tenant (c) On 27 October 2023, there was a further call from a neighbouring tenant, recorded as follows: Neighbouring Tenant – The tenant called up advising this tenant is out threatening with a knife and all the neighbouring tenants are scared for their lives and have called the Police on him. Police have been called to attend and take him away as he is not fit to live by himself.
These events were also witnessed by the landlord’s agent, [The landlord's agent], who verified that the tenant was seen waving a knife around and running between the units, threatening other tenants.
The landlord called the Police during the incident on 27 October and around 5 police cars attended. The tenant was taken away and has not occupied the premises since. It is unknown if he is in custody. His rent has been in arrears for 26 days. There are strong smells and many flies coming from his unit. Analysis
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 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 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 find that the landlord has established that anti-social behaviour has occurred on the premises by the tenant. 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.
Because [The landlord/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4726051 — Harassment

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4726051 — Harassment

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