What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5036672 about?

The tribunal order states: By consent, the tenancy of [The tenant/s] at 10 Parakai Street,

How much money was awarded in case 5036672?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5036672?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5036672?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11073908-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5036672 about?

The tribunal order states: By consent, the tenancy of [The tenant/s] at 10 Parakai Street,

How much money was awarded in case 5036672?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5036672?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5036672?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11073908-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

10 Parakai Street, Paraparaumu, Paraparaumu 5032 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5036672 — Exemplary damages

Order

By consent, the tenancy of [The tenant/s] at 10 Parakai Street, Paraparaumu, Paraparaumu 5032 is terminated, and possession is granted to Berrymans Property Management & Rentals Limited as agent for Srinivasan Shankar, at 11.59pm on Wednesday 20 November 2024.

The application for exemplary damages is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for 3 separate incidents of anti-social behaviour by the tenant; exemplary damages for alleged unlawful acts by the tenant; and an order for the removal of a relocatable cabin.

The tenant has applied for reduction of the term of her tenancy.

The parties have agreed to mutually end the tenancy on 20 November 2024. I have made a termination order by consent with possession to pass to the landlord that day.

The landlord has applied for exemplary damages for the tenant having more than the stated number of people reside at the premises, and for performing, or allowing others to perform, an unlawful act – using the premises for an unlawful purpose.

The landlord’s representative described observing a male smoking cannabis during an inspection. She also produced a report of a police complaint by a neighbour alleging frequent cannabis smoking at the premises.

The tenant said she accepted that a friend had smoked cannabis but once she found out she told him to leave.

The tenant said that she asked the other people living at the premises to leave once she received a 14-day notice. After that they only visited occasionally.

The landlord’s representative said she had received many complaints from neighbours about the behaviour of the tenant and her friends, the most recent being today - a complaint about loud noise.

The Tribunal cannot make any order relating to the most recent complaint. The remedy for that and all the other complaints of anti-social behaviour would be termination of the tenancy. That is what the parties have agreed and what has now been formalised.

Any incidents between today and 20 November should be reported to the police if they warrant that.

The neighbours did not give direct evidence about the smoking of cannabis. The tenant denies there has been frequent cannabis use, beyond the incident alerted to her following which she asked her friend to leave. She alleges that the neighbours ‘have it in for her’.

The Tribunal is not persuaded to award exemplary damages in this case given that the tenancy will soon end. That is a remedy, the most appropriate one, when the relationship between the parties has broken down as it has here.

Though the smoking of cannabis is an unlawful act, the Tribunal tends to reserve exemplary damages for more serious or sustained breaches that amount to unlawful acts. That said, the Tribunal thinks it likely that the tenant or others at the premises with her consent, smoked cannabis, despite her denial.

That the Tribunal can award exemplary damages does not always mean that it will or should. This case is best resolved by the termination order made with the agreement of the parties.

The tenant moved a relocatable cabin onto the premises without consent despite the landlord clearly setting out the conditions for such a structure to be moved there.

The Council has issued a notice requiring the cabin to be moved. The tenant undertook to have the cabin removed on 18 November 2024, 3 days after the deadline given by the Council. I have recorded that so the landlord can produce this order to the Council as proof the cabin will be removed.

Upon my enquiry, neither party sought a name suppression order.

I make no order for reimbursement of the filing fees. Each party has succeeded to an extent. An award to one would be cancelled by an award to the other.

Order

By consent, the tenancy of [The tenant/s] at 10 Parakai Street, Paraparaumu, Paraparaumu 5032 is terminated, and possession is granted to Berrymans Property Management & Rentals Limited as agent for Srinivasan Shankar, at 11.59pm on Wednesday 20 November 2024.
The application for exemplary damages is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for 3 separate incidents of anti-social behaviour by the tenant; exemplary damages for alleged unlawful acts by the tenant; and an order for the removal of a relocatable cabin.
The tenant has applied for reduction of the term of her tenancy.
The parties have agreed to mutually end the tenancy on 20 November 2024. I have made a termination order by consent with possession to pass to the landlord that day.
The landlord has applied for exemplary damages for the tenant having more than the stated number of people reside at the premises, and for performing, or allowing others to perform, an unlawful act – using the premises for an unlawful purpose.
The landlord’s representative described observing a male smoking cannabis during an inspection. She also produced a report of a police complaint by a neighbour alleging frequent cannabis smoking at the premises.
The tenant said she accepted that a friend had smoked cannabis but once she found out she told him to leave.
The tenant said that she asked the other people living at the premises to leave once she received a 14-day notice. After that they only visited occasionally.
The landlord’s representative said she had received many complaints from neighbours about the behaviour of the tenant and her friends, the most recent being today - a complaint about loud noise.
The Tribunal cannot make any order relating to the most recent complaint. The remedy for that and all the other complaints of anti-social behaviour would be termination of the tenancy. That is what the parties have agreed and what has now been formalised.
Any incidents between today and 20 November should be reported to the police if they warrant that.
The neighbours did not give direct evidence about the smoking of cannabis. The tenant denies there has been frequent cannabis use, beyond the incident alerted to her following which she asked her friend to leave. She alleges that the neighbours ‘have it in for her’.
The Tribunal is not persuaded to award exemplary damages in this case given that the tenancy will soon end. That is a remedy, the most appropriate one, when the relationship between the parties has broken down as it has here.
Though the smoking of cannabis is an unlawful act, the Tribunal tends to reserve exemplary damages for more serious or sustained breaches that amount to unlawful acts. That said, the Tribunal thinks it likely that the tenant or others at the premises with her consent, smoked cannabis, despite her denial.
That the Tribunal can award exemplary damages does not always mean that it will or should. This case is best resolved by the termination order made with the agreement of the parties.
The tenant moved a relocatable cabin onto the premises without consent despite the landlord clearly setting out the conditions for such a structure to be moved there.
The Council has issued a notice requiring the cabin to be moved. The tenant undertook to have the cabin removed on 18 November 2024, 3 days after the deadline given by the Council. I have recorded that so the landlord can produce this order to the Council as proof the cabin will be removed.
Upon my enquiry, neither party sought a name suppression order.
I make no order for reimbursement of the filing fees. Each party has succeeded to an extent. An award to one would be cancelled by an award to the other.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5036672 — Exemplary damages at 10 Parakai Street, Paraparaumu, Paraparaumu 5032

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5036672 — Exemplary damages at 10 Parakai Street, Paraparaumu, Paraparaumu 5032

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions