How much money was awarded in case 5108132?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5108132?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5108132?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11300810-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5108132?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5108132?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5108132?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11300810-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

21 Karoro Lane, Sydenham, Christchurch 8023 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5108132 — Harassment

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5108132 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.

The tenancy of Driss Schaapveld at 21 Karoro Lane, Sydenham, Christchurch 8023 is terminated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at 3.00pm on Friday 17 January 2025.

Driss Schaapveld must pay [The applicant/s] $27.00 immediately being the filing fee on the application.

Reasons

The landlord’s representatives attended the hearing. The tenant did not attend.

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 states that the anti-social behaviour comprises threatening and abusive behaviour towards one of the landlord’s contractors, and threatening, aggressive and intimidating behaviour towards other tenants.

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 considered the evidence presented by the landlord including documentary evidence and oral witness evidence.

I have determined that the landlord has established that anti-social behaviour has occurred on the premises by the tenant. The landlord has served notices on the tenant as required by the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, and the application to the Tribunal was made within 28 days of the date of the third notice.

I consider it would not be unfair to terminate the tenancy considering 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.

I have granted the landlord possession this Friday as the tenant’s behaviour is such that he poses a risk to the safety and well-being of the landlord’s other tenants.

Because the application is successful, the tenant must pay the landlord’s Tribunal filing fee.

The landlord sought, and is entitled to, name suppression as the application is successful.

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
The tenancy of Driss Schaapveld at 21 Karoro Lane, Sydenham, Christchurch 8023 is terminated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at 3.00pm on Friday 17 January 2025.
Driss Schaapveld must pay [The applicant/s] $27.00 immediately being the filing fee on the application.

Reasons

The landlord’s representatives attended the hearing. The tenant did not attend.
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 states that the anti-social behaviour comprises threatening and abusive behaviour towards one of the landlord’s contractors, and threatening, aggressive and intimidating behaviour towards other tenants.
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 considered the evidence presented by the landlord including documentary evidence and oral witness evidence.
I have determined that the landlord has established that anti-social behaviour has occurred on the premises by the tenant. The landlord has served notices on the tenant as required by the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, and the application to the Tribunal was made within 28 days of the date of the third notice.
I consider it would not be unfair to terminate the tenancy considering 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.
I have granted the landlord possession this Friday as the tenant’s behaviour is such that he poses a risk to the safety and well-being of the landlord’s other tenants.
Because the application is successful, the tenant must pay the landlord’s Tribunal filing fee.
The landlord sought, and is entitled to, name suppression as the application is successful.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5108132 — Harassment at 21 Karoro Lane, Sydenham, Christchurch 8023

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5108132 — Harassment at 21 Karoro Lane, Sydenham, Christchurch 8023

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Key findings

Frequently asked questions