What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4994048 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Natalie Peita at [Tenancy address suppressed] is terminated,

How much money was awarded in case 4994048?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4994048?

The primary dispute was Harassment. Related themes: Unit Titles.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4994048?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10910627-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4994048 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Natalie Peita at [Tenancy address suppressed] is terminated,

How much money was awarded in case 4994048?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4994048?

The primary dispute was Harassment. Related themes: Unit Titles.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4994048?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10910627-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4994048 — Harassment

Order

The tenancy of Natalie Peita at [Tenancy address suppressed] is terminated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at 11:59pm Thursday 10 October 2024.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing via remote teleconference. There was no attendance by the tenant. The telephone call to the tenant went straight to voicemail.
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.
The landlord is seeking termination and possession based on anti-social behaviour. The tenancy started on 21 June 2024. The Tenancy is a periodic agreement.
The landlord has served the first anti-social behaviour notice on 2 September 2024 relating to loud yelling and arguing. Security attended and found the apartment door damaged. The tenant’s partner was escorted out of the building and arrested by police on 27 August 2024. The landlord knows this having viewed the CCTV footage.
The second breach notice was served on 2 September 2024 relating to loud yelling and arguing coming from apartment 1232 on 8 August 2024. The landlord confirmed that security attended.
The third notice was served on 2 September 2024 in relation to a trolley having been stolen on Tuesday 27 August 2024. The landlord reviewed the camera footage which confirmed that the tenant had taken it.
The landlord served a further notice dated 9 September 2024 in respect of excessive noise.
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.
I have taken into account the evidence presented by the landlord as set out above.
I have determined that the landlord has established that anti-social behaviour has occurred on the premises by the tenant or a person on the tenancy with the tenant’s permission. The landlord has served notices on the tenant as required in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, and the application to the Tribunal was made within 28 days of the date of the third notice. The landlord also provided further evidence from the Body Corporate of inappropriate behaviour by the tenant which I have sighted.
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.
I cannot consider the impact on the tenant, in making an order for termination of the tenancy.
The landlord is not seeking reimbursement of the filing fee.
The landlord also agreed to withdraw his claim for damage to the apartment front door. The landlord will pursue this claim when the exit inspection has taken place.
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 – section 95A Residential Tenancies Act.
The landlord applied for a name suppression order. The landlord is entitled to name suppression as the application is successful – see section 95A RTA.

Order

The tenancy of Natalie Peita at [Tenancy address suppressed] is terminated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at 11:59pm Thursday 10 October 2024.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing via remote teleconference. There was no attendance by the tenant. The telephone call to the tenant went straight to voicemail.
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.
The landlord is seeking termination and possession based on anti-social behaviour. The tenancy started on 21 June 2024. The Tenancy is a periodic agreement.
The landlord has served the first anti-social behaviour notice on 2 September 2024 relating to loud yelling and arguing. Security attended and found the apartment door damaged. The tenant’s partner was escorted out of the building and arrested by police on 27 August 2024. The landlord knows this having viewed the CCTV footage.
The second breach notice was served on 2 September 2024 relating to loud yelling and arguing coming from apartment 1232 on 8 August 2024. The landlord confirmed that security attended.
The third notice was served on 2 September 2024 in relation to a trolley having been stolen on Tuesday 27 August 2024. The landlord reviewed the camera footage which confirmed that the tenant had taken it.
The landlord served a further notice dated 9 September 2024 in respect of excessive noise.
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.
I have taken into account the evidence presented by the landlord as set out above.
I have determined that the landlord has established that anti-social behaviour has occurred on the premises by the tenant or a person on the tenancy with the tenant’s permission. The landlord has served notices on the tenant as required in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, and the application to the Tribunal was made within 28 days of the date of the third notice. The landlord also provided further evidence from the Body Corporate of inappropriate behaviour by the tenant which I have sighted.
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.
I cannot consider the impact on the tenant, in making an order for termination of the tenancy.
The landlord is not seeking reimbursement of the filing fee.
The landlord also agreed to withdraw his claim for damage to the apartment front door. The landlord will pursue this claim when the exit inspection has taken place.
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 – section 95A Residential Tenancies Act.
The landlord applied for a name suppression order. The landlord is entitled to name suppression as the application is successful – see section 95A RTA.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4994048 — Harassment

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4994048 — Harassment

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