What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4905273 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenant’s name and identifying details must not be published.

How much money was awarded in case 4905273?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4905273?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4905273?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10916213-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4905273 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenant’s name and identifying details must not be published.

How much money was awarded in case 4905273?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4905273?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4905273?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10916213-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Flat 203, 139C Greys Avenue, Auckland Central, Auckland Tenancy Tribunal Case 4905273 — Harassment

Order

The tenant’s name and identifying details must not be published.
The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Introduction

The tenant’s father attended the hearing for the tenant. The tenant did not attend due to not being well enough. 1
Roberta Perese attended for the landlord.
The tenant claims that the landlord failed to take reasonable steps to ensure that its other tenants interfered with his reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy.
The landlord denies the claim. 2 1 I heard this matter on 3 October 2024.
The landlord has recently relocated the tenant to new premises that it also operates. The tenant’s father confirmed that his son if finding the new premises are suitable and support his son’s wellness. Background
The tenancy began 4 September 2023 and ended on about 29 August 2024. The premises is located within a large newly built social housing development in Central Auckland.
The tenant’s father communicated his son’s complaints to the landlord, which included that there was fighting in the corridors, noise and partying, someone had called him “white trash”, and someone had taken a swing at him over his head when he was bending down to check his letterbox.
Ms Perese says the complaints did not provide sufficient detail for the landlord to “use its tools provided under the RTA”. The complaints did not specify the time, date, or the persons involved, and were delayed. If the landlord could not identify who was allegedly interfering with the tenant’s reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy it could not even be confident any of its other tenants were even involved.
The tenant’s father detailed a more specific complaint about a threatening note. His son’s Housing Support Manager had left a note on his premises front door on 11 December 2023. The note had originally read, “Plse call me asap about your complaints”. However, someone had written later written on it, “No complains about your neighbours OK bitch”.
The tenant and his father complained to Police about the threatening note on 20 December 2023. Police took no action, however, because while the tenant and his father “suspect someone on his floor of writing this...they have nil specific suspects”. Police did not disclose any other reports in respect to the tenancy.
The tenant was already vulnerable due to his traumatic experiences in another of the landlord’s premises. His doctor confirms in a letter dated 8 December 2023 (from a telephone consultation on 1 December 2023): In my medical opinion I feel that he needs to be moved to quieter and safer accommodation urgently. He has even had to stay at mothers place and then father's place as is afraid to go to Greys Ave. 2 The landlord did not deny a similar claim made by the tenant last year: [Tenant] v Kainga Ora – Homes and Communities [2023] NZTT 4592910. He has a past history of concussion, depression, anxiety states, post-traumatic stress disorder, He ls on multiple meds, he needs a stable and relaxed and normally quiet environment
Because the tenant felt unsafe in the premises, spent little time there. He stayed with his parents or on various people’s couches. Consequently, there were no further incidents at the premises. Legal principles
Section 45(1)(e) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) sets out the landlord’s obligations to take steps to prevent its tenants from interfering with another tenant’s peace. That paragraph provides that landlords must: (e) 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.
To succeed in its claim, the applicant must establish the claim to the standard of proof of proof on the balance of probabilities. Discussion
The evidence before me of the tenant’s complaints to the landlord lack cogent detail.
Police could not progress the threatening note complaint due to lack of evidence the that would identify perpetrator. 3 Yet, that complaint is the complaint that was the most detailed.
The landlord is not an enforcement agency. Given the information it had, it could not reasonably have been expected to identify the perpetrators involved, or even establish whether they were tenants of the landlord or verify the nature and extent of the interferences with the tenant’s reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy.
I agree with Ms Perese’s submission that the landlord was hamstrung by a lack of information that would allow it to take any steps to address the tenant’s complaints.
I do not doubt the sincerity of the tenant’s father’s evidence or his belief that his son was not safe in the premises. However, it has not been proven on the balance of probabilities that the landlord failed to take all reasonable steps to 3 Police Privacy Act disclosure indicates this was the only complaint the tenant made to Police during the tenancy. ensure that none of the landlord’s other tenants caused or permitted any interference with the tenant’s reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy.
It follows, the claim must be dismissed.
Happily, however, the landlord did recently find the tenant different premises that are to his liking. Hopefully, his new home will continue to support his health and wellbeing. Non-publication
Under s 95A(4) of the RTA, the Tribunal on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest the name or any identifying particulars of any party, not be published.
To preserve the integrity of the Tribunal’s previous suppression order it is appropriate to order suppression here. Further, having regard to the interests of the tenant and the public interest name suppression is called for. Publication of the tenant’s name could make him more susceptible to the bullying behaviour he has suffered from in the landlord’s premises recently.
A non-publication order is therefore made for the tenant.

Order

The tenant’s name and identifying details must not be published.
The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Introduction

The tenant’s father attended the hearing for the tenant. The tenant did not attend due to not being well enough. 1
Roberta Perese attended for the landlord.
The tenant claims that the landlord failed to take reasonable steps to ensure that its other tenants interfered with his reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy.
The landlord denies the claim. 2 1 I heard this matter on 3 October 2024.
The landlord has recently relocated the tenant to new premises that it also operates. The tenant’s father confirmed that his son if finding the new premises are suitable and support his son’s wellness. Background
The tenancy began 4 September 2023 and ended on about 29 August 2024. The premises is located within a large newly built social housing development in Central Auckland.
The tenant’s father communicated his son’s complaints to the landlord, which included that there was fighting in the corridors, noise and partying, someone had called him “white trash”, and someone had taken a swing at him over his head when he was bending down to check his letterbox.
Ms Perese says the complaints did not provide sufficient detail for the landlord to “use its tools provided under the RTA”. The complaints did not specify the time, date, or the persons involved, and were delayed. If the landlord could not identify who was allegedly interfering with the tenant’s reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy it could not even be confident any of its other tenants were even involved.
The tenant’s father detailed a more specific complaint about a threatening note. His son’s Housing Support Manager had left a note on his premises front door on 11 December 2023. The note had originally read, “Plse call me asap about your complaints”. However, someone had written later written on it, “No complains about your neighbours OK bitch”.
The tenant and his father complained to Police about the threatening note on 20 December 2023. Police took no action, however, because while the tenant and his father “suspect someone on his floor of writing this...they have nil specific suspects”. Police did not disclose any other reports in respect to the tenancy.
The tenant was already vulnerable due to his traumatic experiences in another of the landlord’s premises. His doctor confirms in a letter dated 8 December 2023 (from a telephone consultation on 1 December 2023): In my medical opinion I feel that he needs to be moved to quieter and safer accommodation urgently. He has even had to stay at mothers place and then father's place as is afraid to go to Greys Ave. 2 The landlord did not deny a similar claim made by the tenant last year: [Tenant] v Kainga Ora – Homes and Communities [2023] NZTT 4592910. He has a past history of concussion, depression, anxiety states, post-traumatic stress disorder, He ls on multiple meds, he needs a stable and relaxed and normally quiet environment
Because the tenant felt unsafe in the premises, spent little time there. He stayed with his parents or on various people’s couches. Consequently, there were no further incidents at the premises. Legal principles
Section 45(1)(e) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) sets out the landlord’s obligations to take steps to prevent its tenants from interfering with another tenant’s peace. That paragraph provides that landlords must: (e) 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.
To succeed in its claim, the applicant must establish the claim to the standard of proof of proof on the balance of probabilities. Discussion
The evidence before me of the tenant’s complaints to the landlord lack cogent detail.
Police could not progress the threatening note complaint due to lack of evidence the that would identify perpetrator. 3 Yet, that complaint is the complaint that was the most detailed.
The landlord is not an enforcement agency. Given the information it had, it could not reasonably have been expected to identify the perpetrators involved, or even establish whether they were tenants of the landlord or verify the nature and extent of the interferences with the tenant’s reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy.
I agree with Ms Perese’s submission that the landlord was hamstrung by a lack of information that would allow it to take any steps to address the tenant’s complaints.
I do not doubt the sincerity of the tenant’s father’s evidence or his belief that his son was not safe in the premises. However, it has not been proven on the balance of probabilities that the landlord failed to take all reasonable steps to 3 Police Privacy Act disclosure indicates this was the only complaint the tenant made to Police during the tenancy. ensure that none of the landlord’s other tenants caused or permitted any interference with the tenant’s reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy.
It follows, the claim must be dismissed.
Happily, however, the landlord did recently find the tenant different premises that are to his liking. Hopefully, his new home will continue to support his health and wellbeing. Non-publication
Under s 95A(4) of the RTA, the Tribunal on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest the name or any identifying particulars of any party, not be published.
To preserve the integrity of the Tribunal’s previous suppression order it is appropriate to order suppression here. Further, having regard to the interests of the tenant and the public interest name suppression is called for. Publication of the tenant’s name could make him more susceptible to the bullying behaviour he has suffered from in the landlord’s premises recently.
A non-publication order is therefore made for the tenant.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4905273 — Harassment at Flat 203, 139C Greys Avenue, Auckland Central, Auckland

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4905273 — Harassment at Flat 203, 139C Greys Avenue, Auckland Central, Auckland

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions