What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4890289 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the parties’ names and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 4890289?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4890289?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4890289?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10444310-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4890289 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the parties’ names and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 4890289?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4890289?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4890289?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10444310-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

8 Kingfisher Place, Taihape, Taihape 4720 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4890289 — 14-day notice

Order

The Tribunal orders suppression of the parties’ names and identifying details.
The landlord’s application is dismissed.
The parties will meet at the property this Friday 14 June 2024 at 10 am for a property inspection.
If there are matters requiring remedy, the landlord is to give the tenant 14 days’ written notice to remedy the specified matters.
If the tenant does not remedy the matters within that timeframe, the landlord can request that this application be brought back before the Tribunal with new evidence regarding the matters which require remedy and the matter will be re- opened.

Reasons

Both parties attended 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.
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.
The landlord has issued three notices for anti-social behaviour. They were all issued on the same date but for incidents which occurred on three separate occasions.
As discussed at the hearing, the Tribunal’s view is that for an application under section 55A RTA to be successful, all three notices cannot be issued on one day. The purpose of giving notice to a tenant is so that they may correct or remedy their behaviour. If the notices are all given one day, the tenant does not have an opportunity to do so. See the Tribunal’s decision 4301453.
The landlord’s application for termination under section 55A RTA is dismissed.
The tenant’s attendance at the hearing to oppose the landlord’s application shows that she understands the seriousness of the allegations made about her. Given the change in her circumstances, it is to be hoped that there will be no further incidents. Landlord’s application for breach under section 56(1) RTA
The landlord has issued breach notices to the tenant.
The tenant produced evidence that she has carried out work to remedy those breaches.
The landlord has not had an opportunity to inspect the property and satisfy itself that the work has been carried out satisfactorily.
The landlord also has a claim for the expense of securing the front door that was not included in this application.
It is appropriate that the landlord inspects the property with the tenant in order to be satisfied that the works have been completed satisfactorily and that there are no other breaches by the tenant.
The parties agreed to an inspection of the property at 10 am Friday 14 June 2024.
If there are any outstanding matters, the landlord is to issue a notice to the tenant giving her 14 days within which to remedy these matters.
If the matters in the notice are not remedied satisfactorily, the landlord can apply to the Tribunal to have its application re-opened so that a hearing can be held to determine its application for termination under section 56 RTA.

Order

The Tribunal orders suppression of the parties’ names and identifying details.
The landlord’s application is dismissed.
The parties will meet at the property this Friday 14 June 2024 at 10 am for a property inspection.
If there are matters requiring remedy, the landlord is to give the tenant 14 days’ written notice to remedy the specified matters.
If the tenant does not remedy the matters within that timeframe, the landlord can request that this application be brought back before the Tribunal with new evidence regarding the matters which require remedy and the matter will be re- opened.

Reasons

Both parties attended 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.
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.
The landlord has issued three notices for anti-social behaviour. They were all issued on the same date but for incidents which occurred on three separate occasions.
As discussed at the hearing, the Tribunal’s view is that for an application under section 55A RTA to be successful, all three notices cannot be issued on one day. The purpose of giving notice to a tenant is so that they may correct or remedy their behaviour. If the notices are all given one day, the tenant does not have an opportunity to do so. See the Tribunal’s decision 4301453.
The landlord’s application for termination under section 55A RTA is dismissed.
The tenant’s attendance at the hearing to oppose the landlord’s application shows that she understands the seriousness of the allegations made about her. Given the change in her circumstances, it is to be hoped that there will be no further incidents. Landlord’s application for breach under section 56(1) RTA
The landlord has issued breach notices to the tenant.
The tenant produced evidence that she has carried out work to remedy those breaches.
The landlord has not had an opportunity to inspect the property and satisfy itself that the work has been carried out satisfactorily.
The landlord also has a claim for the expense of securing the front door that was not included in this application.
It is appropriate that the landlord inspects the property with the tenant in order to be satisfied that the works have been completed satisfactorily and that there are no other breaches by the tenant.
The parties agreed to an inspection of the property at 10 am Friday 14 June 2024.
If there are any outstanding matters, the landlord is to issue a notice to the tenant giving her 14 days within which to remedy these matters.
If the matters in the notice are not remedied satisfactorily, the landlord can apply to the Tribunal to have its application re-opened so that a hearing can be held to determine its application for termination under section 56 RTA.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4890289 — 14-day notice at 8 Kingfisher Place, Taihape, Taihape 4720

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4890289 — 14-day notice at 8 Kingfisher Place, Taihape, Taihape 4720

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