What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4812260 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Tanita Moana Jewels Ormsby at 9B Scanlen Terrace, Kelston,

How much money was awarded in case 4812260?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $2,975.05 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4812260?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4812260?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10159680-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4812260 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Tanita Moana Jewels Ormsby at 9B Scanlen Terrace, Kelston,

How much money was awarded in case 4812260?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $2,975.05 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4812260?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4812260?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10159680-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

9B Scanlen Terrace, Kelston, Auckland 0602 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4812260 — Property damage

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4812260 — net $2,479.49 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Garage door replacement	$2,975.05	Garage door replacement
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,479.49
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,479.49

The tenancy of Tanita Moana Jewels Ormsby at 9B Scanlen Terrace, Kelston, Auckland 0602 is terminated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at

59pm, Thursday 18 April 2024.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $516.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

Tanita Moana Jewels Ormsby must pay [The landlord/s] $2,479.49 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not attend 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 anti-social behaviour is arguments, fights, and loud banging, loud screaming, drinking, laughing and swearing at 2am in the morning. The landlord had received complaints from several neighbours.

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 claimed for damage to the garage door. The premises were new when the tenant moved in. She was the first tenant. The landlord has replaced the damaged garage door and produced the invoice for the cost of replacement. The photographs show that the garage door was damaged, and the landlord said that it could not close properly. I award the cost of replacing the garage door.

Because [The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee. For the same reason I grant the landlord’s request for suppression of name.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4812260 — net $2,479.49 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Garage door replacement	$2,975.05	Garage door replacement
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,479.49
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,479.49

Order

The tenancy of Tanita Moana Jewels Ormsby at 9B Scanlen Terrace, Kelston, Auckland 0602 is terminated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at
59pm, Thursday 18 April 2024.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $516.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.
Tanita Moana Jewels Ormsby must pay [The landlord/s] $2,479.49 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not attend 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 anti-social behaviour is arguments, fights, and loud banging, loud screaming, drinking, laughing and swearing at 2am in the morning. The landlord had received complaints from several neighbours.
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 claimed for damage to the garage door. The premises were new when the tenant moved in. She was the first tenant. The landlord has replaced the damaged garage door and produced the invoice for the cost of replacement. The photographs show that the garage door was damaged, and the landlord said that it could not close properly. I award the cost of replacing the garage door.
Because [The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee. For the same reason I grant the landlord’s request for suppression of name.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4812260 — Property damage at 9B Scanlen Terrace, Kelston, Auckland 0602

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4812260 — Property damage at 9B Scanlen Terrace, Kelston, Auckland 0602

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