What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4832637 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of [The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] at

How much money was awarded in case 4832637?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4832637?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4832637?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10117793-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4832637 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of [The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] at

How much money was awarded in case 4832637?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4832637?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4832637?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10117793-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 10, 78 Mount Smart Road, Onehunga, Auckland Tenancy Tribunal Case 4832637 — 14-day notice

Order

The tenancy of [The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] at Unit/Flat 10, 78 Mount Smart Road, Onehunga, Auckland 1061 is terminated, and possession is granted to Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities immediately.
The Tribunal further orders pursuant to Section 138 of the District Court Act 2016, that this termination can be enforced with immediate effect.

Reasons

The Tribunal must consider an application filed by the landlord seeking a termination of the tenancy on the grounds of assault and other unlawful behaviour.
Only the landlord appeared at the hearing. I am satisfied that the tenants have been property notified of the hearing, and therefore I will proceed to consider the claim in their absence. I note that the landlord has also made efforts to remind the tenants of the hearing.

BACKGROUND

The tenancy agreement records the two co-tenants as [The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s]. The tenancy commenced on 14 September 2022, and relates to unit 10 at 78 Mount Smart Road, Onehunga, Auckland.
On 31 January 2024 the landlord issued an anti-social behaviour notice to the tenants, warning them to rein in their behaviour. The notice states: We recently spoke with you about the incident that occurred on 22 December 2023 at approximately 8.15am at 10/78 Mount Smart Rd (your home) which we consider amounts to anti-social behaviour. We understand the details of the incident to be as follows: •At approximately 8.15am on 22 December 2023, a female visitor to your home, who we understand to be Mr Toto's partner, [the victim], was pushed from the second-floor balcony of your home. [the victim] sustained serious injuries, and other residents at the complex provided [the victim] with comfort and support while waiting for the emergency services to arrive. This behaviour had significant impact on other residents. •Mr Toto has since been charged with intent to injure for this incident as Police believe Mr Toto pushed [the victim] from the balcony. The police reference number for this incident is [redacted]. •On the same day, Police located methamphetamine, and utensils associated with methamphetamine use at your home. •• On 02 January 2024, Mr Toto spat at a neighbour, and has since been charged with minor assault by Police. We consider this to be anti-social behavior because the incident has caused your neighbours and other residents in the complex significant mental trauma and distress. This is a breach of your tenancy agreement. It is important this does not happen again.
On 8 February 2024 an email was sent to the landlord from Senior Constable Allan of the of New Zealand Polices stating: I can confirm that a call was made to police on the 3/2/2024 at 1252pm regarding a tenant from unit 10/78 Mt Smart Road threatening to kill another tenant [redacted] from unit [redacted].
The Senior Constable included the notes from the officer who later attended, which record: At 1252hrs on the 3rd of February 2024 Police received a call from [redacted] had been threatened by someone living in 10/78 Mount Smart Road. On Police arrival [redacted] informed Police that a woman from flat 10 by the name of Virginia, believed to be KING/Virginia, saw [redacted] walking past and said, "Fuck you cunt, we will kill you". [redacted] believed KING had been smoking Methamphetamine the night prior until the early hours of the 3rd. [redacted] stated there are often different men visiting flat 10 and believes that KING smokes methamphetamine regularly with these men.... Police conducted door knocks at flat 10 but had no answer. Further door knocks to be conducted at a later date.
On 11 March 2024 the landlord filed this application seeking an order terminating the tenancy.

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations.
That includes a requirement that the party bringing the claim (the applicant), establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. The balance of probabilities means more likely than un-likely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely.
This obligation carried by the applicant is referred to as the “burden of proof”. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.

LANDLORDS CASE

The landlord seeks an urgent termination of the tenancy on the basis of the tenant threatening to assault a neighbour, including the incident where someone was pushed off a balcony.

ANALYSIS

The Tribunal must consider whether to grant the landlords request to terminate this tenancy.
The landlord has made serious allegations against the tenants, and there is support for some of these allegations in documentation from the Police. These allegations have been put to the tenants in advance of the hearing, and the tenants would have been aware that they will be considered by the Tribunal today. Ultimately the tenants have not appeared at the hearing and disputed these allegations or even communicated to the Tribunal they dispute them. Noting that the standard to establish the claim is the civil standard, I am satisfied that the allegations have been proven to the balance of probabilities.
Section 40 of the RTA sets out the tenants responsibilities, and that includes the prohibition on: a. Using the premises for an unlawful purpose (s40(2)(b)); and b. Interfering with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of other tenants of the landlord, or persons residing in the neighbourhood (s40(2)(b)).
Section 55 of the RTA holds that the Tribunal ‘shall’ order a termination of the tenancy when the tenant has assaulted or threatened to assault a neighbour or occupier of the building in which the tenancy is located. I am satisfied that it is likely that has occurred given the described events with the treats and spitting at a neighbour.
Furthermore, section 56 would allow the Tribunal to order a termination of the tenancy if the tenant has breached an obligation under the RTA, and if the breach was not capable of remedy, the breach would be of such an extent or nature that it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy.
In this case I am deeply concerned around the incident where the tenant is said to have pushed another person off the balcony. In my assessment, this must been deemed as the tenant using the premises for an unlawful purpose. While not argued by the landlord at the hearing today, there is also the statement that police found methamphetamine and utensils, which would also go to the premises being used for an unlawful purpose. I have no reservation in concluding that the breaches would be of such a nature or extent, that it would be inequitable to decline to immediately terminate this tenancy.
Section 138 of the District Court Act 2016 holds that normally an order cannot be enforced until 48 hours have expired, unless a “Judge grants leave”. However, section 106(2) of the RTA which relates to enforcement of possession orders, confirms that reference to a ‘Judge’ in section 138(1) applies as if it were reference to a Tenancy Adjudicator.
This is a case where it is appropriate that leave be granted for an immediate enforcement of the possession order.

Order

The tenancy of [The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] at Unit/Flat 10, 78 Mount Smart Road, Onehunga, Auckland 1061 is terminated, and possession is granted to Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities immediately.
The Tribunal further orders pursuant to Section 138 of the District Court Act 2016, that this termination can be enforced with immediate effect.

Reasons

The Tribunal must consider an application filed by the landlord seeking a termination of the tenancy on the grounds of assault and other unlawful behaviour.
Only the landlord appeared at the hearing. I am satisfied that the tenants have been property notified of the hearing, and therefore I will proceed to consider the claim in their absence. I note that the landlord has also made efforts to remind the tenants of the hearing.

BACKGROUND

The tenancy agreement records the two co-tenants as [The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s]. The tenancy commenced on 14 September 2022, and relates to unit 10 at 78 Mount Smart Road, Onehunga, Auckland.
On 31 January 2024 the landlord issued an anti-social behaviour notice to the tenants, warning them to rein in their behaviour. The notice states: We recently spoke with you about the incident that occurred on 22 December 2023 at approximately 8.15am at 10/78 Mount Smart Rd (your home) which we consider amounts to anti-social behaviour. We understand the details of the incident to be as follows: •At approximately 8.15am on 22 December 2023, a female visitor to your home, who we understand to be Mr Toto's partner, [the victim], was pushed from the second-floor balcony of your home. [the victim] sustained serious injuries, and other residents at the complex provided [the victim] with comfort and support while waiting for the emergency services to arrive. This behaviour had significant impact on other residents. •Mr Toto has since been charged with intent to injure for this incident as Police believe Mr Toto pushed [the victim] from the balcony. The police reference number for this incident is [redacted]. •On the same day, Police located methamphetamine, and utensils associated with methamphetamine use at your home. •• On 02 January 2024, Mr Toto spat at a neighbour, and has since been charged with minor assault by Police. We consider this to be anti-social behavior because the incident has caused your neighbours and other residents in the complex significant mental trauma and distress. This is a breach of your tenancy agreement. It is important this does not happen again.
On 8 February 2024 an email was sent to the landlord from Senior Constable Allan of the of New Zealand Polices stating: I can confirm that a call was made to police on the 3/2/2024 at 1252pm regarding a tenant from unit 10/78 Mt Smart Road threatening to kill another tenant [redacted] from unit [redacted].
The Senior Constable included the notes from the officer who later attended, which record: At 1252hrs on the 3rd of February 2024 Police received a call from [redacted] had been threatened by someone living in 10/78 Mount Smart Road. On Police arrival [redacted] informed Police that a woman from flat 10 by the name of Virginia, believed to be KING/Virginia, saw [redacted] walking past and said, "Fuck you cunt, we will kill you". [redacted] believed KING had been smoking Methamphetamine the night prior until the early hours of the 3rd. [redacted] stated there are often different men visiting flat 10 and believes that KING smokes methamphetamine regularly with these men.... Police conducted door knocks at flat 10 but had no answer. Further door knocks to be conducted at a later date.
On 11 March 2024 the landlord filed this application seeking an order terminating the tenancy.

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations.
That includes a requirement that the party bringing the claim (the applicant), establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. The balance of probabilities means more likely than un-likely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely.
This obligation carried by the applicant is referred to as the “burden of proof”. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.

LANDLORDS CASE

The landlord seeks an urgent termination of the tenancy on the basis of the tenant threatening to assault a neighbour, including the incident where someone was pushed off a balcony.

ANALYSIS

The Tribunal must consider whether to grant the landlords request to terminate this tenancy.
The landlord has made serious allegations against the tenants, and there is support for some of these allegations in documentation from the Police. These allegations have been put to the tenants in advance of the hearing, and the tenants would have been aware that they will be considered by the Tribunal today. Ultimately the tenants have not appeared at the hearing and disputed these allegations or even communicated to the Tribunal they dispute them. Noting that the standard to establish the claim is the civil standard, I am satisfied that the allegations have been proven to the balance of probabilities.
Section 40 of the RTA sets out the tenants responsibilities, and that includes the prohibition on: a. Using the premises for an unlawful purpose (s40(2)(b)); and b. Interfering with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of other tenants of the landlord, or persons residing in the neighbourhood (s40(2)(b)).
Section 55 of the RTA holds that the Tribunal ‘shall’ order a termination of the tenancy when the tenant has assaulted or threatened to assault a neighbour or occupier of the building in which the tenancy is located. I am satisfied that it is likely that has occurred given the described events with the treats and spitting at a neighbour.
Furthermore, section 56 would allow the Tribunal to order a termination of the tenancy if the tenant has breached an obligation under the RTA, and if the breach was not capable of remedy, the breach would be of such an extent or nature that it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy.
In this case I am deeply concerned around the incident where the tenant is said to have pushed another person off the balcony. In my assessment, this must been deemed as the tenant using the premises for an unlawful purpose. While not argued by the landlord at the hearing today, there is also the statement that police found methamphetamine and utensils, which would also go to the premises being used for an unlawful purpose. I have no reservation in concluding that the breaches would be of such a nature or extent, that it would be inequitable to decline to immediately terminate this tenancy.
Section 138 of the District Court Act 2016 holds that normally an order cannot be enforced until 48 hours have expired, unless a “Judge grants leave”. However, section 106(2) of the RTA which relates to enforcement of possession orders, confirms that reference to a ‘Judge’ in section 138(1) applies as if it were reference to a Tenancy Adjudicator.
This is a case where it is appropriate that leave be granted for an immediate enforcement of the possession order.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4832637 — 14-day notice at Unit/Flat 10, 78 Mount Smart Road, Onehunga, Auckland

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4832637 — 14-day notice at Unit/Flat 10, 78 Mount Smart Road, Onehunga, Auckland

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

BACKGROUND

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

LANDLORDS CASE

ANALYSIS

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

BACKGROUND

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

LANDLORDS CASE

ANALYSIS

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions