What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4851860 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Ayva Tapaea at Unit/Flat 5, 7 Eden View Road, Sandringham,

How much money was awarded in case 4851860?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4851860?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4851860?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10260199-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4851860 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Ayva Tapaea at Unit/Flat 5, 7 Eden View Road, Sandringham,

How much money was awarded in case 4851860?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4851860?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4851860?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10260199-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit/Flat 5, 7 Eden View Road, Sandringham, Auckland Tenancy Tribunal Case 4851860 — Harassment

Order

The tenancy of Ayva Tapaea at Unit/Flat 5, 7 Eden View Road, Sandringham, Auckland 1025 is terminated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at
59pm on Sunday 5 May 2024.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing represented by [redacted]. There was no appearance for Ms Tapaea, however I am satisfied that she has been made aware of the hearing, therefore it went ahead in her absence.
The landlord, a social housing provider, has applied to the Tribunal for an order terminating the tenancy on the grounds of anti-social behaviour from Ms Tapaea. They say that she has been engaging in disruptive, abusive and aggressive behaviour and she has damaged another unit in the premise.
The landlord provided evidence of complaints from tenants in the complex and neighbouring properties stating that over the preceding four months there have been instances when Ms Tapaea has: a. Been yelling aggressively at very late hours; b. Displaying aggressive outbursts; c. Breaking windows and damaging another unit; and d. Punching windows and doors.
The complaints say that the neighbours are feeling threatened and uncomfortable, and some are feeling too uncomfortable to be in the common areas of the property. [redacted] provided photos of damage to another unit which he says Ms Tapaea accepts she caused.
Subject to certain considerations, the Tribunal must 1 make an order terminating the tenancy if it is satisfied: a. on 3 separate occasions within a 90-day period the tenant, Ms Tapaea engaged in anti-social behaviour in connection with the tenancy; and b. on each occasion the landlord gave Ms Tapaea 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.
Four notices have been provided, dated 25 January, 7 March, 18 March, and 10 April. The behaviour appears to have continued despite these notices.
I have taken into account the evidence presented by the landlord as set out above. I accept they have engaged with Lifewise who are supporting Ms Tapaea but they have not been able to resolve the situation that appears to be related to Ms Tapaea’s relationship with another resident in the complex.
I am satisfied that the landlord has established in evidence that anti-social behaviour has occurred on the premises by Ms Tapaea. She has displayed aggressive behaviour on multiple occasions and damaged the unit of the other resident. The landlord has served notices on Ms Tapaea as required in the 1 Section 55A of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 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.
Accordingly, the tenancy is terminated.
The landlord has applied for suppression and as they were successful in their claim, I approve that application.

Order

The tenancy of Ayva Tapaea at Unit/Flat 5, 7 Eden View Road, Sandringham, Auckland 1025 is terminated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at
59pm on Sunday 5 May 2024.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing represented by [redacted]. There was no appearance for Ms Tapaea, however I am satisfied that she has been made aware of the hearing, therefore it went ahead in her absence.
The landlord, a social housing provider, has applied to the Tribunal for an order terminating the tenancy on the grounds of anti-social behaviour from Ms Tapaea. They say that she has been engaging in disruptive, abusive and aggressive behaviour and she has damaged another unit in the premise.
The landlord provided evidence of complaints from tenants in the complex and neighbouring properties stating that over the preceding four months there have been instances when Ms Tapaea has: a. Been yelling aggressively at very late hours; b. Displaying aggressive outbursts; c. Breaking windows and damaging another unit; and d. Punching windows and doors.
The complaints say that the neighbours are feeling threatened and uncomfortable, and some are feeling too uncomfortable to be in the common areas of the property. [redacted] provided photos of damage to another unit which he says Ms Tapaea accepts she caused.
Subject to certain considerations, the Tribunal must 1 make an order terminating the tenancy if it is satisfied: a. on 3 separate occasions within a 90-day period the tenant, Ms Tapaea engaged in anti-social behaviour in connection with the tenancy; and b. on each occasion the landlord gave Ms Tapaea 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.
Four notices have been provided, dated 25 January, 7 March, 18 March, and 10 April. The behaviour appears to have continued despite these notices.
I have taken into account the evidence presented by the landlord as set out above. I accept they have engaged with Lifewise who are supporting Ms Tapaea but they have not been able to resolve the situation that appears to be related to Ms Tapaea’s relationship with another resident in the complex.
I am satisfied that the landlord has established in evidence that anti-social behaviour has occurred on the premises by Ms Tapaea. She has displayed aggressive behaviour on multiple occasions and damaged the unit of the other resident. The landlord has served notices on Ms Tapaea as required in the 1 Section 55A of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 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.
Accordingly, the tenancy is terminated.
The landlord has applied for suppression and as they were successful in their claim, I approve that application.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4851860 — Harassment at Unit/Flat 5, 7 Eden View Road, Sandringham, Auckland

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4851860 — Harassment at Unit/Flat 5, 7 Eden View Road, Sandringham, Auckland

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