What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4893642 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at [Tenancy address suppressed] is terminated,

How much money was awarded in case 4893642?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4893642?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4893642?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10677330-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4893642 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at [Tenancy address suppressed] is terminated,

How much money was awarded in case 4893642?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4893642?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4893642?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10677330-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4893642 — 14-day notice

Order

The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at [Tenancy address suppressed] is terminated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at 5pm Friday 30 August 2024.

Reasons

The landlord attended the continuation hearing today. There was no appearance by the tenant, nor any agency on her behalf.
This matter had been previously adjourned to vary the landlord’s application to include termination.
The adjournment also envisaged an opportunity for the landlord to enter the premises to check the premises are reasonably clean and safe. If that occurred, and an agreed process to ensure the premises can be maintained was agreed, the landlord indicated a preference to withdraw this application before this hearing. That we are here confirms no agreed process was concluded. In fact, the landlord raised additional, emerging concerns regarding this tenancy and tenant threats to cause harm to others.
The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the tenant’s obligations.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

The Tribunal may terminate a tenancy for breach where, due to the nature or extent of the breach, it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate. See section 56(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Where the breach is capable of remedy the landlord must first serve a notice on the tenant requiring them to remedy the breach within at least 14 days and establish that the tenant has failed to do so.
The tenant has breached their obligations by failing to remedy multiple breach notices. The requirements of the notice to remedy dated 22 April 2024 are copied below. It required the tenant to:
The landlord provided additional evidence since the last hearing (prior access to inspect had been problematic). Access was provided but it is apparent from that inspection and the photos provided that the premises remain in a poor condition, justifying the ongoing concerns of the landlord. It also confirms the tenant has not remedied the breaches within the required period.
It would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy because the continued poor condition of the premises cannot continue without some serious impact on health and/or property.
The tenant is aware of the tenancy termination application. This was evidenced in a letter dated on 31 July 2024 from her supporting clinician at Te Whatu Ora/Health New Zealand (although the writer believes the tenant does not understand why). That letter also informed that a further assessment was planned for the tenant to better understand her needs vis-à-vis functioning in the community.
The extended termination date in this order was requested by the landlord to allow the above assessment to conclude and for appropriate support for the tenant to be put in place to assist her into her next residence. Filing fee
The landlord declined any order for the filing fee. Suppression
Section 95A RTA states regarding suppression orders that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
Further, the Tribunal may, on the application of any party to proceedings or on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that all or part of the evidence given or the name or any identifying particulars of any witness or party not be published.
The landlord requested suppression in its application. As it has been wholly successful, suppression is ordered.
Given the vulnerability of the tenant, I apply my own initiative to suppression her details. This was supported by the landlord. I can see no public interest that would override such concerns regarding her being named in this order.

Order

The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at [Tenancy address suppressed] is terminated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at 5pm Friday 30 August 2024.

Reasons

The landlord attended the continuation hearing today. There was no appearance by the tenant, nor any agency on her behalf.
This matter had been previously adjourned to vary the landlord’s application to include termination.
The adjournment also envisaged an opportunity for the landlord to enter the premises to check the premises are reasonably clean and safe. If that occurred, and an agreed process to ensure the premises can be maintained was agreed, the landlord indicated a preference to withdraw this application before this hearing. That we are here confirms no agreed process was concluded. In fact, the landlord raised additional, emerging concerns regarding this tenancy and tenant threats to cause harm to others.
The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the tenant’s obligations.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

The Tribunal may terminate a tenancy for breach where, due to the nature or extent of the breach, it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate. See section 56(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Where the breach is capable of remedy the landlord must first serve a notice on the tenant requiring them to remedy the breach within at least 14 days and establish that the tenant has failed to do so.
The tenant has breached their obligations by failing to remedy multiple breach notices. The requirements of the notice to remedy dated 22 April 2024 are copied below. It required the tenant to:
The landlord provided additional evidence since the last hearing (prior access to inspect had been problematic). Access was provided but it is apparent from that inspection and the photos provided that the premises remain in a poor condition, justifying the ongoing concerns of the landlord. It also confirms the tenant has not remedied the breaches within the required period.
It would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy because the continued poor condition of the premises cannot continue without some serious impact on health and/or property.
The tenant is aware of the tenancy termination application. This was evidenced in a letter dated on 31 July 2024 from her supporting clinician at Te Whatu Ora/Health New Zealand (although the writer believes the tenant does not understand why). That letter also informed that a further assessment was planned for the tenant to better understand her needs vis-à-vis functioning in the community.
The extended termination date in this order was requested by the landlord to allow the above assessment to conclude and for appropriate support for the tenant to be put in place to assist her into her next residence. Filing fee
The landlord declined any order for the filing fee. Suppression
Section 95A RTA states regarding suppression orders that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
Further, the Tribunal may, on the application of any party to proceedings or on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that all or part of the evidence given or the name or any identifying particulars of any witness or party not be published.
The landlord requested suppression in its application. As it has been wholly successful, suppression is ordered.
Given the vulnerability of the tenant, I apply my own initiative to suppression her details. This was supported by the landlord. I can see no public interest that would override such concerns regarding her being named in this order.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4893642 — 14-day notice

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4893642 — 14-day notice

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions