What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4847581 about?

The tribunal order states: Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities must pay [The tenant/s] $3,000.00

How much money was awarded in case 4847581?

Compensation: $3,000.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4847581?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4847581?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10748780-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4847581 about?

The tribunal order states: Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities must pay [The tenant/s] $3,000.00

How much money was awarded in case 4847581?

Compensation: $3,000.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4847581?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4847581?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10748780-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit/Flat 12, 78 Mount Smart Road, Onehunga, Auckland Tenancy Tribunal Case 4847581 — Tenancy dispute

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4847581 — net $3,000.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation	$3,000.00	Compensation
Net award	$3,000.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$3,000.00

Order

Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities must pay [The tenant/s] $3,000.00 immediately. This can be paid by way of a rent credit.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 5 th August 2024.
The tenant claimed that the landlord failed to take all reasonable steps to ensure that none of the landlord’s other tenants causes or permits any interference with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of the tenant in the use of the premises.
The tenant sought compensation of $15,000.00. Background
The tenant started residing at a Kāinga Ora housing complex located at 78 Mount Smart Road, Onehunga from 15 th March 2023. The tenant had not previously resided at a Kāinga Ora housing complex before.
The tenant at unit 10 displayed antisocial behaviour causing disturbance to other tenants within the complex.
The tenant was affected especially as she had been recovering after two major abdominal surgeries. Furthermore, she was undertaking studies for a very important examination but failed due to the stress and unpleasant environment that she was in causing her to lose $2,500.00 examination fee.
The antisocial issues suffered by the tenant were as follows: a. Unit 10 tenant’s girlfriend always stayed at unit 10 despite not being a named tenant. The couple fought every second day in the hallway and they tried to open the tenant’s door when doing so. The tenant did not respond. b. The girlfriend sat in front of the tenant’s door every time they had a fight and often blocked the way for the door intimidating the tenant. This made it difficult for the community home visit nurses who were coming for the tenant’s recovery. The tenant says that she was once attacked and as a result the community nurse advised the tenant to either visit their clinic or perform her own dressing. As the tenant was not in a condition to drive or to be driven, the tenant did her own dressings which put her into distress. c. The female often drank alcohol in the hallway which was right in front of the tenant’s door and used the power point in the hallway to charge her phone. She would sit there for hours and leave food scraps and alcohol bottles. They also spat in the hallway and the lift as well as spilling alcohol. d. The mother drank alcohol in the hallway and made loud noise at late nights, fought with her partner and brought random indecent drunken guys into the building, swearing loudly, spitting, throwing alcohol bottles and food scraps. e. One of the drunken guys urinated in the staircase and slept in the hallway in front of the tenant’s unit. He often left a bicycle on the same level. f. There was pervasive smell of alcohol, marijuana and drugs that constantly infiltrated to the tenant’s unit causing the tenant vertigo, nausea and dizziness causing her sleepless nights. g. Unit 10 tenant brought supermarket trolley to level 2 and often left the trolley in front of the tenant’s unit. The tenant had difficulty pushing the trolley away to access the lift due to the stitches in her abdomen. h. There had been multiple calls from unit 10 on the intercom at late nights to let them inside the complex. i. The male from unit 10 pushed his girlfriend off the balcony from level 2 leaving the tenant shaken and profoundly saddened. Complaints
The tenant made verbal complaints to the building manager about unit 10. The building manager was an employee of Kāinga Ora. Nothing was done.
On 29 th August 2023, the tenant rang the Kāinga Ora call centre complaining about unit 10. No action was taken by Kāinga Ora.
A further complaint was made after two weeks to the building manager. Videos taken by the tenant were shown to the building manager.
On 26 th September 2023, the tenant called the call centre again. No action was taken.
On 9 th October 2023, the tenant escalated the complaint to a higher manger. There was no acknowledgment or response from the manager or from Kāinga Ora.
In November or early December 2023, the tenant spoke to the property manager during a home visit. The property manager advised that unit 10 was being investigated and that if their anti-social behaviour was to continue in the 90-day period, that action will be taken against them.
The tenant, along with 5 other tenants from different floors, went to see the property manager at the Kāinga Ora office. At the end of the meeting, the property manager assured that unit 10 would be evicted within 14 days. However, the eviction did not take place within that period.
On 14 th February 2024, the tenant gave Kāinga Ora a written 14-day notice to remedy the issues that arose from unit 10.
On 11 th March 2024, Kāinga Ora applied to the Tribunal to terminate the tenancy of unit 10. As a result, the tenancy at unit 10 was terminated on 29 th March 2024 based on antisocial behaviour. Landlord’s obligations
Under section 45(1)(e) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, the landlord must take all reasonable steps to ensure that none of the landlord’s other tenants causes or permits any interference with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of the tenant in the use of the premises. However, a breach of this obligation does not make it an unlawful act. No exemplary damages can be ordered against the landlord for such breach.
The landlord acknowledged that there had been inadequate response to the tenant’s complaints.
The tenant was offered full refund of the rent from 29 th August 2023, the date of the first complaint. That equates to $2,184. The tenant declined this offer and the landlord offered $3,000.00 as compensation. The tenant declined this also.
At the hearing, the tenant showed me videos that she took of what she could see happening in the hallway. It seemed as if unit 10 tenant's girlfriend was trying to seek refuge after a domestic verbal argument in the whole way. The video did not seem to be the worst example of the antisocial behaviour suffered by the tenant.
Although I acknowledge that there have been disturbances, I cannot say that it was something unexpected in a multi-unit Kāinga Ora housing complex. This does not mean that the tenant should bear disturbance to their peace.
I agree with the amount offered by the landlord of $3,000.00 as being adequate and reasonable compensation for the trouble suffered.
I do not find that the tenant can prove that she has failed her examination because of the noise or concerns from unit 10. The tenant could have employed other measures to deal with the noise such as a noise cancelling headset. It is simply unrealistic for a Kāinga Ora housing complex to not have some difficult tenants.
The tenant asked the Tribunal to consider this application in light of the decision made in NZTT 4821977. I have considered that decision. Despite that decision granting a further $3,000.00 as general damages in addition to the rent reimbursement, I decline to do the same for this matter. The tenant only gave the 14-day notice in February 2024 and the tenants in unit 10 were evicted approximately 6 weeks or so after that.
If tenants of Kāinga Ora are awarded general damages in addition to all the rent being reimbursed for antisocial behaviour of its neighboring tenants, then tenants will effectively be earning money while living at the premises rent-free.
It is the unfortunate reality that Kāinga Ora sometimes houses tenants that exhibits antisocial behaviour.
I also acknowledge that Kāinga Ora was in a difficult position with termination policies that have changed with the change of government and its practices had to be changed to reflect the policy changes.
Therefore, I order the landlord to compensate the tenant $3,000.00. This can be paid by way of a rent credit.
As the tenant sought name suppression, name suppression will be granted for this tenant.
It cannot be said that the tenant had been wholly or substantially successful with the application.
Therefore, I decline to award the reimbursement of the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4847581 — net $3,000.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation	$3,000.00	Compensation
Net award	$3,000.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$3,000.00

Order

Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities must pay [The tenant/s] $3,000.00 immediately. This can be paid by way of a rent credit.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 5 th August 2024.
The tenant claimed that the landlord failed to take all reasonable steps to ensure that none of the landlord’s other tenants causes or permits any interference with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of the tenant in the use of the premises.
The tenant sought compensation of $15,000.00. Background
The tenant started residing at a Kāinga Ora housing complex located at 78 Mount Smart Road, Onehunga from 15 th March 2023. The tenant had not previously resided at a Kāinga Ora housing complex before.
The tenant at unit 10 displayed antisocial behaviour causing disturbance to other tenants within the complex.
The tenant was affected especially as she had been recovering after two major abdominal surgeries. Furthermore, she was undertaking studies for a very important examination but failed due to the stress and unpleasant environment that she was in causing her to lose $2,500.00 examination fee.
The antisocial issues suffered by the tenant were as follows: a. Unit 10 tenant’s girlfriend always stayed at unit 10 despite not being a named tenant. The couple fought every second day in the hallway and they tried to open the tenant’s door when doing so. The tenant did not respond. b. The girlfriend sat in front of the tenant’s door every time they had a fight and often blocked the way for the door intimidating the tenant. This made it difficult for the community home visit nurses who were coming for the tenant’s recovery. The tenant says that she was once attacked and as a result the community nurse advised the tenant to either visit their clinic or perform her own dressing. As the tenant was not in a condition to drive or to be driven, the tenant did her own dressings which put her into distress. c. The female often drank alcohol in the hallway which was right in front of the tenant’s door and used the power point in the hallway to charge her phone. She would sit there for hours and leave food scraps and alcohol bottles. They also spat in the hallway and the lift as well as spilling alcohol. d. The mother drank alcohol in the hallway and made loud noise at late nights, fought with her partner and brought random indecent drunken guys into the building, swearing loudly, spitting, throwing alcohol bottles and food scraps. e. One of the drunken guys urinated in the staircase and slept in the hallway in front of the tenant’s unit. He often left a bicycle on the same level. f. There was pervasive smell of alcohol, marijuana and drugs that constantly infiltrated to the tenant’s unit causing the tenant vertigo, nausea and dizziness causing her sleepless nights. g. Unit 10 tenant brought supermarket trolley to level 2 and often left the trolley in front of the tenant’s unit. The tenant had difficulty pushing the trolley away to access the lift due to the stitches in her abdomen. h. There had been multiple calls from unit 10 on the intercom at late nights to let them inside the complex. i. The male from unit 10 pushed his girlfriend off the balcony from level 2 leaving the tenant shaken and profoundly saddened. Complaints
The tenant made verbal complaints to the building manager about unit 10. The building manager was an employee of Kāinga Ora. Nothing was done.
On 29 th August 2023, the tenant rang the Kāinga Ora call centre complaining about unit 10. No action was taken by Kāinga Ora.
A further complaint was made after two weeks to the building manager. Videos taken by the tenant were shown to the building manager.
On 26 th September 2023, the tenant called the call centre again. No action was taken.
On 9 th October 2023, the tenant escalated the complaint to a higher manger. There was no acknowledgment or response from the manager or from Kāinga Ora.
In November or early December 2023, the tenant spoke to the property manager during a home visit. The property manager advised that unit 10 was being investigated and that if their anti-social behaviour was to continue in the 90-day period, that action will be taken against them.
The tenant, along with 5 other tenants from different floors, went to see the property manager at the Kāinga Ora office. At the end of the meeting, the property manager assured that unit 10 would be evicted within 14 days. However, the eviction did not take place within that period.
On 14 th February 2024, the tenant gave Kāinga Ora a written 14-day notice to remedy the issues that arose from unit 10.
On 11 th March 2024, Kāinga Ora applied to the Tribunal to terminate the tenancy of unit 10. As a result, the tenancy at unit 10 was terminated on 29 th March 2024 based on antisocial behaviour. Landlord’s obligations
Under section 45(1)(e) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, the landlord must take all reasonable steps to ensure that none of the landlord’s other tenants causes or permits any interference with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of the tenant in the use of the premises. However, a breach of this obligation does not make it an unlawful act. No exemplary damages can be ordered against the landlord for such breach.
The landlord acknowledged that there had been inadequate response to the tenant’s complaints.
The tenant was offered full refund of the rent from 29 th August 2023, the date of the first complaint. That equates to $2,184. The tenant declined this offer and the landlord offered $3,000.00 as compensation. The tenant declined this also.
At the hearing, the tenant showed me videos that she took of what she could see happening in the hallway. It seemed as if unit 10 tenant's girlfriend was trying to seek refuge after a domestic verbal argument in the whole way. The video did not seem to be the worst example of the antisocial behaviour suffered by the tenant.
Although I acknowledge that there have been disturbances, I cannot say that it was something unexpected in a multi-unit Kāinga Ora housing complex. This does not mean that the tenant should bear disturbance to their peace.
I agree with the amount offered by the landlord of $3,000.00 as being adequate and reasonable compensation for the trouble suffered.
I do not find that the tenant can prove that she has failed her examination because of the noise or concerns from unit 10. The tenant could have employed other measures to deal with the noise such as a noise cancelling headset. It is simply unrealistic for a Kāinga Ora housing complex to not have some difficult tenants.
The tenant asked the Tribunal to consider this application in light of the decision made in NZTT 4821977. I have considered that decision. Despite that decision granting a further $3,000.00 as general damages in addition to the rent reimbursement, I decline to do the same for this matter. The tenant only gave the 14-day notice in February 2024 and the tenants in unit 10 were evicted approximately 6 weeks or so after that.
If tenants of Kāinga Ora are awarded general damages in addition to all the rent being reimbursed for antisocial behaviour of its neighboring tenants, then tenants will effectively be earning money while living at the premises rent-free.
It is the unfortunate reality that Kāinga Ora sometimes houses tenants that exhibits antisocial behaviour.
I also acknowledge that Kāinga Ora was in a difficult position with termination policies that have changed with the change of government and its practices had to be changed to reflect the policy changes.
Therefore, I order the landlord to compensate the tenant $3,000.00. This can be paid by way of a rent credit.
As the tenant sought name suppression, name suppression will be granted for this tenant.
It cannot be said that the tenant had been wholly or substantially successful with the application.
Therefore, I decline to award the reimbursement of the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4847581 — Tenancy dispute at Unit/Flat 12, 78 Mount Smart Road, Onehunga, Auckland

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4847581 — Tenancy dispute at Unit/Flat 12, 78 Mount Smart Road, Onehunga, Auckland

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions