What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5158532?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Anne Maria Porter at 74 Wymondley Road, Otara, Auckland

How much money was awarded in case 5158532?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5158532?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5158532?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11547686-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5158532?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Anne Maria Porter at 74 Wymondley Road, Otara, Auckland

How much money was awarded in case 5158532?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5158532?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5158532?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11547686-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

74 Wymondley Road, Otara, Auckland 2025 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5158532 — 14-day notice

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing by telephone at the scheduled start time of

30 am.

The tenant was then telephoned but explained that she was not at home and so the Tribunal agreed to delay the start time to 11.45 am.

The tenant was telephoned at that time. She would not co-operate in the hearing by speaking over the Adjudicator, ignoring his warnings and interrupting. Having been warned twice, she was removed from the 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 Tribunal issued an order on 4 December 2024 (“the order”) requiring the tenant to: a. Remove all dogs from the property within 10 days of the order; and b. Remove any cabins from the property within 14 days of the order.

The landlord gave evidence that the tenant has not removed either the dogs or the cabin from the premises. The landlord provided further photographic evidence of dogs roaming outside the property, the continued presence of the cabin on the property and the impact the roaming dogs are having on the neighbours and the local primary school whose pupils and parents feel unsafe walking past the property because of her roaming dogs.

The Tribunal is satisfied that these breaches are of such a nature and extent that it would be inequitable to refuse to make an order terminating the tenancy for the following reasons: a. The tenant is in breach of an order of the Tribunal. It is now nearly three months since the tenant was required to comply with the order and has not done so. b. The breaches are longstanding. The landlord issued breach notices on 10 June 2024 and 5 September 2024. The breaches have continued for a period of nine months and the tenant has not taken the steps required to remedy them. c. The breaches are being committed intentionally by the tenant. d. The Tribunal cannot be satisfied that the tenant will not continue with these breaches. e. The landlord has obligations to the neighbours of the premises who are also the landlord’s tenants. While the tenant has breached specific provisions in her tenancy agreement regarding the dogs and the cabin, she is also in breach of her obligation under section 40(2)(c) RTA that she shall not cause or permit any interference with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of any of the landlord’s other tenants in the use of the premises occupied by those other tenants, or with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of any other person residing in the neighbourhood. f. The breaches are serious. The landlord’s evidence is that the dogs are unregistered, unrestrained and have been known to bite. The landlord’s evidence is that they are a hazard to pedestrians and to vehicles. g. Termination is not a disproportionate response to these breaches. The tenant has been given ample opportunity to remedy them and has chosen not to.

The tenancy is to be terminated and possession granted to the landlord.

Order

The tenancy of Anne Maria Porter at 74 Wymondley Road, Otara, Auckland 2025 is terminated, and possession is granted to Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities, today Monday 10 March 2025 at 11.59 pm.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing by telephone at the scheduled start time of
30 am.
The tenant was then telephoned but explained that she was not at home and so the Tribunal agreed to delay the start time to 11.45 am.
The tenant was telephoned at that time. She would not co-operate in the hearing by speaking over the Adjudicator, ignoring his warnings and interrupting. Having been warned twice, she was removed from the 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 Tribunal issued an order on 4 December 2024 (“the order”) requiring the tenant to: a. Remove all dogs from the property within 10 days of the order; and b. Remove any cabins from the property within 14 days of the order.
The landlord gave evidence that the tenant has not removed either the dogs or the cabin from the premises. The landlord provided further photographic evidence of dogs roaming outside the property, the continued presence of the cabin on the property and the impact the roaming dogs are having on the neighbours and the local primary school whose pupils and parents feel unsafe walking past the property because of her roaming dogs.
The Tribunal is satisfied that these breaches are of such a nature and extent that it would be inequitable to refuse to make an order terminating the tenancy for the following reasons: a. The tenant is in breach of an order of the Tribunal. It is now nearly three months since the tenant was required to comply with the order and has not done so. b. The breaches are longstanding. The landlord issued breach notices on 10 June 2024 and 5 September 2024. The breaches have continued for a period of nine months and the tenant has not taken the steps required to remedy them. c. The breaches are being committed intentionally by the tenant. d. The Tribunal cannot be satisfied that the tenant will not continue with these breaches. e. The landlord has obligations to the neighbours of the premises who are also the landlord’s tenants. While the tenant has breached specific provisions in her tenancy agreement regarding the dogs and the cabin, she is also in breach of her obligation under section 40(2)(c) RTA that she shall not cause or permit any interference with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of any of the landlord’s other tenants in the use of the premises occupied by those other tenants, or with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of any other person residing in the neighbourhood. f. The breaches are serious. The landlord’s evidence is that the dogs are unregistered, unrestrained and have been known to bite. The landlord’s evidence is that they are a hazard to pedestrians and to vehicles. g. Termination is not a disproportionate response to these breaches. The tenant has been given ample opportunity to remedy them and has chosen not to.
The tenancy is to be terminated and possession granted to the landlord.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5158532 — 14-day notice at 74 Wymondley Road, Otara, Auckland 2025

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5158532 — 14-day notice at 74 Wymondley Road, Otara, Auckland 2025

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