What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5011708 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant’s name and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 5011708?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; The Landlord’S Other Tenants Causes…: $500.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5011708?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5011708?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11102587-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5011708 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant’s name and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 5011708?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; The Landlord’S Other Tenants Causes…: $500.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5011708?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5011708?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11102587-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5011708 — Exemplary damages

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5011708. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
the landlord’s other tenants causes interference with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of the tenant in the use	$500.00		the landlord’s other tenants causes interference with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of the tenant in the use
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00		Filing fee reimbursement

Order

The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant’s name and identifying details.
must pay immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:
The tenant’s claim for exemplary damages is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
In his application, the tenant says over six months from October 2023 he has endured sleepless nights and bad behaviour from his neighbour most nights.
He says he has corresponded with the landlord but that nothing was done until February/March 2024. the tenant seeks compensation and exemplary damages against his landlord for their failure to act promptly to alleviate his suffering.
For the record, the subject neighbour’s tenancy was terminated and the neighbour left # B Place, Orakei on 8 February 2024.
The tenant’s first documented complaint to the landlord is on 18 October 2023. The relevant period surrounding this complaint is therefore from 18 October 2023 to 8 February 2024.
The tenant says the neighbour’s behaviour has affected his mental and physical health and feels there is no protection for the weak and vulnerable.
He feels that his social housing landlord’s Housing Support Manager has acted far too slowly to his legitimate concerns and behaved unreasonably.
The tenant says that from the time a complaint has been made it should take only two weeks for resolution.
He says that the property would often have broken glass everywhere due to the drunken behaviour of the neighbouring occupant.
The tenant’s evidence includes: • a number of text exchanges between himself and noise control officer Marko Pavlovic 18 October 2023 where Marko advises that an excessive noise notice was issued to the subject neighbour and that if there is excessive noise in the next few days the equipment would be seized. • an email from the tenant to Housing Support Manager, Jordan about an incident on 5 November 2023 where the subject neighbour was returned to his unit by Police and his behaviour had made him feel unsafe. • an email from the tenant to Jordan dated 9 December 2023 regarding a party at the subject neighbour’s unit on 9 December where there was excessive noise. • an email to Irene, Manager Housing and Wellbeing Support, regarding an incident 25 January 2024 where there was an all-night party. the tenant says noise control did nothing. The tenant says that the following morning the subject neighbour was taken away in handcuffs. • an email dated 2 February 2024 reporting damage to the letter box of the subject neighbour. He reported that one of the occupant’s associates drove straight into the letter box whilst under the influence of doping / alcohol. • an email dated 3 February 2024 from the tenant saying on Wednesday night he was in his garden and approached by the subject neighbour asking for money and a phone. This was followed by an all-night disturbance and noise control did not respond. • an email from Senior Housing Support Manager, Jordan acknowledging the tenant’s complaint of 3 February saying that they were actively working on resolving the issue and encouraging the tenant to call Police if he felt unsafe. • an email from Manager Housing and Wellbeing Support, Irene, of 5 February 2024 apologising for the delay in responding and giving assurance that the tenant’s complaints were actively being worked on. • an email from Brad, Manager Housing and Wellbeing Support, acknowledging the tenant’s concerns and inviting him to a meeting to discuss those concerns in person.
Kāinga Ora’s response to the tenant’s complaints were that when it became clear that the subject neighbour was either unwilling or unable to modify his behaviour to a degree that was appropriate to the community in which he lived, steps were taken to end his tenancy at the earliest opportunity.
The issue before me is whether appropriate steps had been taken by the landlord, including to end the subject neighbour’s tenancy, at the earliest opportunity.
In response to the tenant’s complaint of 18 October 2023, Kāinga Ora met with the subject neighbour to discuss expectations for behaviour and sought an assurance that the occupant would behave appropriately as per RTA and tenancy agreement. This was followed up with a request for information to Police regarding disruptive behaviour at the premises. The police responded via email to confirm there was nothing relevant to report. A breach letter was issued to the subject neighbour 30 October 2023.
In response to the tenant’s complaint of 7 November 2023 where he talks about the subject neighbour being dropped off in handcuffs by Police. Kāinga Ora contacted the occupant and invited him to a meeting to discuss the incident. The occupant did not attend the meeting at the pre-agreed time.
A request was made to Noise Control to further substantiate the complaints and to determine the appropriate course of action. Noise Control confirmed that between 6 December 2022 and 22 October 2023 (ten months), there had been 32 call outs regarding the subject neighbour. On two of those occasions excessive noise was identified, and the appropriate notices were served.
The tenant made a further complaint about the earlier event where the subject neighbour was brought back to his property in handcuffs. It was not until the end of January 2024 that Kāinga Ora managed to meet with the subject neighbour to discuss concerns. The subject neighbour was reminded of his obligations and issued with a breach notice.
In response to the complaint regarding the damaged letter box received February 2024, Irene, Manager Housing and Wellbeing Support contacted the tenant and advised that Kāinga Ora was following a process and believed that we were very close to a permanent resolution.
In response to the incident of 25 January 2024 a section 55A notice was issued to the subject neighbour. Pursuant to section 55A RTA, a landlord under a periodic tenancy may apply to the Tribunal for an order terminating the tenancy on the ground of anti-social behaviour after issuing 3 breach notices to the tenant.
The tenancy at the subject neighbour was ultimately terminated on 8 February 2024 and the tenant concerned was removed from the property on that date.
It is my finding that Kāinga Ora took reasonable steps available to them to deal with the issues raised by the tenant in relation to his concerns and frustrations regarding the behaviour of the subject neighbour. I consider however that the actual time that Kāinga Ora took of some 3 and half months to finally stop the interference to the tenant’s quiet enjoyment to be inordinate. I find from the facts that the first section 55A breach notice ought to have been issued in late October or early November 2023.
Had appropriate steps been taken by the landlord at the earliest opportunity in October/November 2023, the interruption to the tenant’s quiet enjoyment would have been alleviated by December 2023 or January 2024.
I consider it appropriate to award the tenant general damages for stress and inconvenience suffered in the sum of $500.00 under the circumstances.
I do not consider however that the landlord has in any way caused or permitted interference with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of the tenant in the use of the premises by the tenant. The tenant’s claim founded on a breach of the landlord’s obligations under section 38(2) RTA therefore fails.
In the upshot, only the claim that the landlord breached section 45(1)(e) RTA by not taking 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 is successful.
Finally, I wish to comment that I do not consider it unreasonable for the landlord’s housing managers (and supervisors) to have withheld information from the tenant on actual steps taken against the subject neighbour at the material times. As a social housing agency, I recognise there are a host of factors that the landlord needs to assess and act upon when dealing with complaints of such a nature. There are also matters of privacy of the subject neighbour which cannot be openly disclosed to the tenant.
By far and large, I consider from the evidence adduced by both parties, including the noise control reports submitted by the landlord and the tenant, that the landlord (and their staff) had acted reasonably in responding to the tenant’s complaints. It is only the timing of the landlord’s actions that I have found in favour of the tenant by awarding general damages in the sum of $500.00.
As the tenant is partly successful, I also award the tenant reimbursement of the filing fee and order name suppression. J Tam (reissued on) 20 November 2024

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5011708. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
the landlord’s other tenants causes interference with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of the tenant in the use	$500.00		the landlord’s other tenants causes interference with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of the tenant in the use
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00		Filing fee reimbursement

Order

The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant’s name and identifying details.
must pay immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:
The tenant’s claim for exemplary damages is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
In his application, the tenant says over six months from October 2023 he has endured sleepless nights and bad behaviour from his neighbour most nights.
He says he has corresponded with the landlord but that nothing was done until February/March 2024. the tenant seeks compensation and exemplary damages against his landlord for their failure to act promptly to alleviate his suffering.
For the record, the subject neighbour’s tenancy was terminated and the neighbour left # B Place, Orakei on 8 February 2024.
The tenant’s first documented complaint to the landlord is on 18 October 2023. The relevant period surrounding this complaint is therefore from 18 October 2023 to 8 February 2024.
The tenant says the neighbour’s behaviour has affected his mental and physical health and feels there is no protection for the weak and vulnerable.
He feels that his social housing landlord’s Housing Support Manager has acted far too slowly to his legitimate concerns and behaved unreasonably.
The tenant says that from the time a complaint has been made it should take only two weeks for resolution.
He says that the property would often have broken glass everywhere due to the drunken behaviour of the neighbouring occupant.
The tenant’s evidence includes: • a number of text exchanges between himself and noise control officer Marko Pavlovic 18 October 2023 where Marko advises that an excessive noise notice was issued to the subject neighbour and that if there is excessive noise in the next few days the equipment would be seized. • an email from the tenant to Housing Support Manager, Jordan about an incident on 5 November 2023 where the subject neighbour was returned to his unit by Police and his behaviour had made him feel unsafe. • an email from the tenant to Jordan dated 9 December 2023 regarding a party at the subject neighbour’s unit on 9 December where there was excessive noise. • an email to Irene, Manager Housing and Wellbeing Support, regarding an incident 25 January 2024 where there was an all-night party. the tenant says noise control did nothing. The tenant says that the following morning the subject neighbour was taken away in handcuffs. • an email dated 2 February 2024 reporting damage to the letter box of the subject neighbour. He reported that one of the occupant’s associates drove straight into the letter box whilst under the influence of doping / alcohol. • an email dated 3 February 2024 from the tenant saying on Wednesday night he was in his garden and approached by the subject neighbour asking for money and a phone. This was followed by an all-night disturbance and noise control did not respond. • an email from Senior Housing Support Manager, Jordan acknowledging the tenant’s complaint of 3 February saying that they were actively working on resolving the issue and encouraging the tenant to call Police if he felt unsafe. • an email from Manager Housing and Wellbeing Support, Irene, of 5 February 2024 apologising for the delay in responding and giving assurance that the tenant’s complaints were actively being worked on. • an email from Brad, Manager Housing and Wellbeing Support, acknowledging the tenant’s concerns and inviting him to a meeting to discuss those concerns in person.
Kāinga Ora’s response to the tenant’s complaints were that when it became clear that the subject neighbour was either unwilling or unable to modify his behaviour to a degree that was appropriate to the community in which he lived, steps were taken to end his tenancy at the earliest opportunity.
The issue before me is whether appropriate steps had been taken by the landlord, including to end the subject neighbour’s tenancy, at the earliest opportunity.
In response to the tenant’s complaint of 18 October 2023, Kāinga Ora met with the subject neighbour to discuss expectations for behaviour and sought an assurance that the occupant would behave appropriately as per RTA and tenancy agreement. This was followed up with a request for information to Police regarding disruptive behaviour at the premises. The police responded via email to confirm there was nothing relevant to report. A breach letter was issued to the subject neighbour 30 October 2023.
In response to the tenant’s complaint of 7 November 2023 where he talks about the subject neighbour being dropped off in handcuffs by Police. Kāinga Ora contacted the occupant and invited him to a meeting to discuss the incident. The occupant did not attend the meeting at the pre-agreed time.
A request was made to Noise Control to further substantiate the complaints and to determine the appropriate course of action. Noise Control confirmed that between 6 December 2022 and 22 October 2023 (ten months), there had been 32 call outs regarding the subject neighbour. On two of those occasions excessive noise was identified, and the appropriate notices were served.
The tenant made a further complaint about the earlier event where the subject neighbour was brought back to his property in handcuffs. It was not until the end of January 2024 that Kāinga Ora managed to meet with the subject neighbour to discuss concerns. The subject neighbour was reminded of his obligations and issued with a breach notice.
In response to the complaint regarding the damaged letter box received February 2024, Irene, Manager Housing and Wellbeing Support contacted the tenant and advised that Kāinga Ora was following a process and believed that we were very close to a permanent resolution.
In response to the incident of 25 January 2024 a section 55A notice was issued to the subject neighbour. Pursuant to section 55A RTA, a landlord under a periodic tenancy may apply to the Tribunal for an order terminating the tenancy on the ground of anti-social behaviour after issuing 3 breach notices to the tenant.
The tenancy at the subject neighbour was ultimately terminated on 8 February 2024 and the tenant concerned was removed from the property on that date.
It is my finding that Kāinga Ora took reasonable steps available to them to deal with the issues raised by the tenant in relation to his concerns and frustrations regarding the behaviour of the subject neighbour. I consider however that the actual time that Kāinga Ora took of some 3 and half months to finally stop the interference to the tenant’s quiet enjoyment to be inordinate. I find from the facts that the first section 55A breach notice ought to have been issued in late October or early November 2023.
Had appropriate steps been taken by the landlord at the earliest opportunity in October/November 2023, the interruption to the tenant’s quiet enjoyment would have been alleviated by December 2023 or January 2024.
I consider it appropriate to award the tenant general damages for stress and inconvenience suffered in the sum of $500.00 under the circumstances.
I do not consider however that the landlord has in any way caused or permitted interference with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of the tenant in the use of the premises by the tenant. The tenant’s claim founded on a breach of the landlord’s obligations under section 38(2) RTA therefore fails.
In the upshot, only the claim that the landlord breached section 45(1)(e) RTA by not taking 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 is successful.
Finally, I wish to comment that I do not consider it unreasonable for the landlord’s housing managers (and supervisors) to have withheld information from the tenant on actual steps taken against the subject neighbour at the material times. As a social housing agency, I recognise there are a host of factors that the landlord needs to assess and act upon when dealing with complaints of such a nature. There are also matters of privacy of the subject neighbour which cannot be openly disclosed to the tenant.
By far and large, I consider from the evidence adduced by both parties, including the noise control reports submitted by the landlord and the tenant, that the landlord (and their staff) had acted reasonably in responding to the tenant’s complaints. It is only the timing of the landlord’s actions that I have found in favour of the tenant by awarding general damages in the sum of $500.00.
As the tenant is partly successful, I also award the tenant reimbursement of the filing fee and order name suppression. J Tam (reissued on) 20 November 2024

Tenancy Tribunal case 5011708 — Exemplary damages

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5011708 — Exemplary damages

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