What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4743210 about?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4743210?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4743210?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: 14-day notice, Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4743210?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9780568-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4743210 about?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4743210?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4743210?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: 14-day notice, Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4743210?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9780568-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 5G, 11A CENTRAL AVENUE, PAPATOETOE, Tenancy Tribunal Case 4743210 — Rent arrears

Order

The application is dismissed.

Reasons

The Landlord attended the hearing. The Tenant did not appear.
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 from the Tenant was he had loud parties all night, the Tenant and/or his visitors swore, were drunk and violent, the Tenant smoked cannabis and the Tenant had approximately five people staying in his room.
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 Landlord as set out above. The Landlord served notices upon the Tenant on 10 November 2023, 13 November 2023 and 15 November 2023. The notices were based on reports received from the neighbouring Tenants via email or phone calls to the Landlord. The notices were difficult to understand in terms of exactly what the anti-social behaviour was because the Landlord copied the neighbouring Tenants complaint exactly from the email into the notice. It was therefore not exactly clear as to what the behaviour was. For example the notice on 13 November 2023 stated: “Hi there after 12 midnight she was storms so, so loud swearing,singing Noone stop her she can do whatever she want”. This was describing the behaviour of a guest of the Tenant however the Landlord should have clearly stated who it was that was being anti-social and summarised what they did. The Tenant could then have an opportunity to remedy their behaviour or challenge the notice.
The neighbouring Tenant who reported the anti-social behaviour was not available to give oral evidence by telephone. There was reference to a police report in one notice but this was not made available to the Tribunal. The Landlord had no other evidence to prove that the anti-social behaviour had actually occurred. They had not seen it themselves and were basing it upon what the neighbouring Tenant reported to them.
I have determined that the landlord has not 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 submitted that the tenancy could be terminated based on section 55(1) (a) of Residential Tenancies Act 1986 whereby the Tenant was 21 days or more in rent arrears on the day the Landlord submitted their application to the Tribunal. The Landlord however clarified the rent arrears with his accounts team during the hearing and whilst the Landlord submitted the Tenant was 25 days in rent arrears at the time of the hearing, on 17 November 2023, when the Landlord filed their application, the Tenant was less than 21 days in rent arrears.
For these reasons, the application for termination is dismissed.

Order

The application is dismissed.

Reasons

The Landlord attended the hearing. The Tenant did not appear.
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 from the Tenant was he had loud parties all night, the Tenant and/or his visitors swore, were drunk and violent, the Tenant smoked cannabis and the Tenant had approximately five people staying in his room.
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 Landlord as set out above. The Landlord served notices upon the Tenant on 10 November 2023, 13 November 2023 and 15 November 2023. The notices were based on reports received from the neighbouring Tenants via email or phone calls to the Landlord. The notices were difficult to understand in terms of exactly what the anti-social behaviour was because the Landlord copied the neighbouring Tenants complaint exactly from the email into the notice. It was therefore not exactly clear as to what the behaviour was. For example the notice on 13 November 2023 stated: “Hi there after 12 midnight she was storms so, so loud swearing,singing Noone stop her she can do whatever she want”. This was describing the behaviour of a guest of the Tenant however the Landlord should have clearly stated who it was that was being anti-social and summarised what they did. The Tenant could then have an opportunity to remedy their behaviour or challenge the notice.
The neighbouring Tenant who reported the anti-social behaviour was not available to give oral evidence by telephone. There was reference to a police report in one notice but this was not made available to the Tribunal. The Landlord had no other evidence to prove that the anti-social behaviour had actually occurred. They had not seen it themselves and were basing it upon what the neighbouring Tenant reported to them.
I have determined that the landlord has not 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 submitted that the tenancy could be terminated based on section 55(1) (a) of Residential Tenancies Act 1986 whereby the Tenant was 21 days or more in rent arrears on the day the Landlord submitted their application to the Tribunal. The Landlord however clarified the rent arrears with his accounts team during the hearing and whilst the Landlord submitted the Tenant was 25 days in rent arrears at the time of the hearing, on 17 November 2023, when the Landlord filed their application, the Tenant was less than 21 days in rent arrears.
For these reasons, the application for termination is dismissed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4743210 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 5G, 11A CENTRAL AVENUE, PAPATOETOE,

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4743210 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 5G, 11A CENTRAL AVENUE, PAPATOETOE,

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions