What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4939560 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Waiata Gage at Unit/Flat 5, 5A Pantera Way, Hillpark, Auckland

How much money was awarded in case 4939560?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4939560?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4939560?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10713777-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4939560 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Waiata Gage at Unit/Flat 5, 5A Pantera Way, Hillpark, Auckland

How much money was awarded in case 4939560?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4939560?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4939560?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10713777-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit/Flat 5, 5A Pantera Way, Hillpark, Auckland 2102 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4939560 — 14-day notice

Order

The tenancy of Waiata Gage at Unit/Flat 5, 5A Pantera Way, Hillpark, Auckland 2102 is terminated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at 4pm on Thursday 15 August 2024.
The bond is to remain in the Bond Centre.

Reasons

The landlord’s employees attended today’s hearing. The tenant did not attend. The hearing was delayed for 25 minutes to allow the tenant to attend, but when she was not present at 3.25pm the matter was heard. I am satisfied that the tenant was aware of today’s hearing as she has been served at her address and her case worker tells me that she told her case worker yesterday that she was attending today’s hearing.
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 several obligations: a) Failing to keep the property clean and tidy. b) Removing smoke alarms from the property. c) Allowing people to live at the property who are not authorised to do so. d) Keeping a dog at the property without the landlord’s consent. e) Smoking Cannabis at the property- using the property for an unlawful purpose. f) Failing to allow or obstructing lawful inspections of the property. g) Damaging the property by causing holes in the walls, damaging cupboards, staining carpet and drawing on the wall. h) Not removing or decontaminating the bathroom of methamphetamine to bring the level of contamination down to a level that is not injurious to health.
When the landlord has come to reinspect the property to ensure compliance with the 14-day notices, the landlord has often been denied access or not being allowed to carry out further testing. The landlord has been to the property in July 2024 after giving notice to carry out methamphetamine testing. The landlord tells me that they observed that the property was in a deteriorating state from when they were last at the property on the 6 June for a routine inspection. They noticed rubbish throughout the property (even though the tenant had been informed of the meth testing) burnt pots on the stove, damaged walls and cupboards, mattresses and furniture barricaded up against the wall and ranch slider, which would cause a hazard in a fire and smoke alarms that have been removed.
I am satisfied that the landlord has given the tenant many opportunities to remedy the breaches (in 14-day notices) and she has not remedied the breaches. The property is in a deteriorating state, the damage has become worse.
I am also satisfied that some of the breaches are incapable of remedy such as smoking cannabis at the property.
It would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy because the tenant has been given many opportunities to rectify her breaches. The number of breaches is considerable, the tenant is refusing to grant access and her behaviour towards the tenancy managers is becoming worse. The methamphetamine tests taken in November 2023 (the last time that the landlord was able to test) show higher levels than those recommended in the Gluckman report as being injurious to health. The tenant has been asked to clean these areas to prevent injury but does not appear to have done so.
The way that the tenant is living in the property makes it a fire hazard, she has removed the smoke alarms, she has barricaded exits and there is clutter and rubbish throughout the home.
The property is one of 35 attached 2-bedroom units in this complex which houses many children. The tenant’s own child is living at the property. I consider the way the tenant is living in the property to be a danger and fire risk to her and her child and the other neighbours in her complex.
The tenant has also been involved in antisocial behaviour at the property. On two recent occasions police have been at the property because of the tenants or people visiting her conduct.
The landlord has asked for name suppression and it is granted.

Order

The tenancy of Waiata Gage at Unit/Flat 5, 5A Pantera Way, Hillpark, Auckland 2102 is terminated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at 4pm on Thursday 15 August 2024.
The bond is to remain in the Bond Centre.

Reasons

The landlord’s employees attended today’s hearing. The tenant did not attend. The hearing was delayed for 25 minutes to allow the tenant to attend, but when she was not present at 3.25pm the matter was heard. I am satisfied that the tenant was aware of today’s hearing as she has been served at her address and her case worker tells me that she told her case worker yesterday that she was attending today’s hearing.
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 several obligations: a) Failing to keep the property clean and tidy. b) Removing smoke alarms from the property. c) Allowing people to live at the property who are not authorised to do so. d) Keeping a dog at the property without the landlord’s consent. e) Smoking Cannabis at the property- using the property for an unlawful purpose. f) Failing to allow or obstructing lawful inspections of the property. g) Damaging the property by causing holes in the walls, damaging cupboards, staining carpet and drawing on the wall. h) Not removing or decontaminating the bathroom of methamphetamine to bring the level of contamination down to a level that is not injurious to health.
When the landlord has come to reinspect the property to ensure compliance with the 14-day notices, the landlord has often been denied access or not being allowed to carry out further testing. The landlord has been to the property in July 2024 after giving notice to carry out methamphetamine testing. The landlord tells me that they observed that the property was in a deteriorating state from when they were last at the property on the 6 June for a routine inspection. They noticed rubbish throughout the property (even though the tenant had been informed of the meth testing) burnt pots on the stove, damaged walls and cupboards, mattresses and furniture barricaded up against the wall and ranch slider, which would cause a hazard in a fire and smoke alarms that have been removed.
I am satisfied that the landlord has given the tenant many opportunities to remedy the breaches (in 14-day notices) and she has not remedied the breaches. The property is in a deteriorating state, the damage has become worse.
I am also satisfied that some of the breaches are incapable of remedy such as smoking cannabis at the property.
It would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy because the tenant has been given many opportunities to rectify her breaches. The number of breaches is considerable, the tenant is refusing to grant access and her behaviour towards the tenancy managers is becoming worse. The methamphetamine tests taken in November 2023 (the last time that the landlord was able to test) show higher levels than those recommended in the Gluckman report as being injurious to health. The tenant has been asked to clean these areas to prevent injury but does not appear to have done so.
The way that the tenant is living in the property makes it a fire hazard, she has removed the smoke alarms, she has barricaded exits and there is clutter and rubbish throughout the home.
The property is one of 35 attached 2-bedroom units in this complex which houses many children. The tenant’s own child is living at the property. I consider the way the tenant is living in the property to be a danger and fire risk to her and her child and the other neighbours in her complex.
The tenant has also been involved in antisocial behaviour at the property. On two recent occasions police have been at the property because of the tenants or people visiting her conduct.
The landlord has asked for name suppression and it is granted.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4939560 — 14-day notice at Unit/Flat 5, 5A Pantera Way, Hillpark, Auckland 2102

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4939560 — 14-day notice at Unit/Flat 5, 5A Pantera Way, Hillpark, Auckland 2102

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