What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5183356?

The tribunal order states: The tenant must carry out the following work to the premises, which must be

How much money was awarded in case 5183356?

Mply With Order 1 Above, Then The La…: $3,000.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5183356?

The primary dispute was Smoke alarms.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5183356?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12137421-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5183356?

The tribunal order states: The tenant must carry out the following work to the premises, which must be

How much money was awarded in case 5183356?

Mply With Order 1 Above, Then The La…: $3,000.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5183356?

The primary dispute was Smoke alarms.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5183356?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12137421-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat Flat 3, 5 Weka Street, The Wood, Nelson 7010 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5183356 — Smoke alarms

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5183356. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
mply with Order 1 above, then the landlord may undertake the work and charge the tenant the costs of this work up to	$3,000.00		mply with Order 1 above, then the landlord may undertake the work and charge the tenant the costs of this work up to

Order

The tenant must carry out the following work to the premises, which must be completed by Sunday 17 July 2025. The tenant is to remove: a. all items that have encroached or been placed in any communal spaces at 5 Weka Street by him. b. any structures erected by the tenant. c. the hung sheets or fabric and the items that they are hung from. d. the make-shift fences. e. all items restricting reasonable access to or from the front and back door of his unit by any person. f. all items against the house or fences that pose a fire risk to the occupants or property. g. all items that are above the height of the boundary fences. h. the home-made water feature and reinstate the back yard to its pre- tenancy condition.
If the tenant fails to comply with Order 1 above, then the landlord may undertake the work and charge the tenant the costs of this work up to $3,000.00. These costs may be treated as rent in arrears and enforced accordingly.
If the cost to complete the work is greater than provided in this order, the landlord may make an application to the Tribunal for compensation, with appropriate supporting evidence.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The landlord was represented by Ms Susan Rea, via preapproved teleconference. Mr Philip Jary attend in person.
This was a rehearing grant after a tenant rehearing application was successful after a work order dated 20 April 2025 was made by another adjudicator.
An adjournment order followed the hearing. The reasons for that are explained in the order dated 11 July 2025 but as noted in that order, the adjournment was made given the history to date and to seek a mutually achievable or, in the alternative, an enforceable outcome.
The landlord has responded within the timetabling provided and I consider it appropriate to conclude the application with this work order based on the hearing, submissions at that time, and the greater detail on specific tasks as now provided.
The landlord claims that the tenant has not keep the premises reasonable clean and tidy. It also claims the tenant has been placing or leaving unwanted items in common areas. Finally, items or fixtures that might interfere with emergency ingress or egress are evidenced/
The landlord wants the problem fixed. A series of photos were provided showing the extent of the areas impacted.
Under section 40(1)(c) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), a tenant must keep the premises, which includes the common areas, reasonably clean and tidy. Section 40(2)(ab) (RTA) requires the tenant must not cause or permit any interference with, or render inoperative, any means of escape from fire.
Where the Tribunal finds the tenant has failed to comply with any of these obligations, where appropriate it may make an order for the landlord to carry out the work. See section 78(1)(e) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
If the work order is not being made by consent of both parties, the Tribunal must also make a monetary order as an alternative to compliance with the work order. This provision does not apply to any work order, or part of a work order, in relation to smoke alarms. See sections 78(2) and 78(2AA) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
A work order may also authorise the landlord to undertake the work and charge the tenant the costs of doing the work, if the tenant should fail to comply with the work order and alternative monetary order. A monetary limit must be imposed by the Tribunal on the amount of costs that can be charged. These costs can be treated as rent in arrears and enforced accordingly. See sections 78(2AAB) and 78(2AAC)(a) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Has the tenant failed to comply with their obligations?

A 14-day notice to remedy was served on the tenant on 6 December 2024.
While some improvement is evidenced, there remain considerable breaches that must be remedied by the tenant, or alternatively by the landlord if not completed by the tenant in the time allowed.
The tenant may consider some installations/items as art but that is a subjective assessment. The landlord has provided sufficient evidence to justify the work orders as made in this order, especially in the common areas where the tenant has no right to place items as he does.
Given some tenant improvements made since the previous order, and having reviewed the recent photos, I have reduced the monetary limit to $3,000.00. An April 2025 contractor quote for $3,758.52 was provided by the landlord. The cap set reflects a possible lower cost but I acknowledge the final cost may be greater, especially if the tenant is not cooperative or responsive. If so, any higher costs incurred, if not accepted by the tenant, can be sought for recovery via a further landlord application.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5183356. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
mply with Order 1 above, then the landlord may undertake the work and charge the tenant the costs of this work up to	$3,000.00		mply with Order 1 above, then the landlord may undertake the work and charge the tenant the costs of this work up to

Order

The tenant must carry out the following work to the premises, which must be completed by Sunday 17 July 2025. The tenant is to remove: a. all items that have encroached or been placed in any communal spaces at 5 Weka Street by him. b. any structures erected by the tenant. c. the hung sheets or fabric and the items that they are hung from. d. the make-shift fences. e. all items restricting reasonable access to or from the front and back door of his unit by any person. f. all items against the house or fences that pose a fire risk to the occupants or property. g. all items that are above the height of the boundary fences. h. the home-made water feature and reinstate the back yard to its pre- tenancy condition.
If the tenant fails to comply with Order 1 above, then the landlord may undertake the work and charge the tenant the costs of this work up to $3,000.00. These costs may be treated as rent in arrears and enforced accordingly.
If the cost to complete the work is greater than provided in this order, the landlord may make an application to the Tribunal for compensation, with appropriate supporting evidence.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The landlord was represented by Ms Susan Rea, via preapproved teleconference. Mr Philip Jary attend in person.
This was a rehearing grant after a tenant rehearing application was successful after a work order dated 20 April 2025 was made by another adjudicator.
An adjournment order followed the hearing. The reasons for that are explained in the order dated 11 July 2025 but as noted in that order, the adjournment was made given the history to date and to seek a mutually achievable or, in the alternative, an enforceable outcome.
The landlord has responded within the timetabling provided and I consider it appropriate to conclude the application with this work order based on the hearing, submissions at that time, and the greater detail on specific tasks as now provided.
The landlord claims that the tenant has not keep the premises reasonable clean and tidy. It also claims the tenant has been placing or leaving unwanted items in common areas. Finally, items or fixtures that might interfere with emergency ingress or egress are evidenced/
The landlord wants the problem fixed. A series of photos were provided showing the extent of the areas impacted.
Under section 40(1)(c) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), a tenant must keep the premises, which includes the common areas, reasonably clean and tidy. Section 40(2)(ab) (RTA) requires the tenant must not cause or permit any interference with, or render inoperative, any means of escape from fire.
Where the Tribunal finds the tenant has failed to comply with any of these obligations, where appropriate it may make an order for the landlord to carry out the work. See section 78(1)(e) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
If the work order is not being made by consent of both parties, the Tribunal must also make a monetary order as an alternative to compliance with the work order. This provision does not apply to any work order, or part of a work order, in relation to smoke alarms. See sections 78(2) and 78(2AA) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
A work order may also authorise the landlord to undertake the work and charge the tenant the costs of doing the work, if the tenant should fail to comply with the work order and alternative monetary order. A monetary limit must be imposed by the Tribunal on the amount of costs that can be charged. These costs can be treated as rent in arrears and enforced accordingly. See sections 78(2AAB) and 78(2AAC)(a) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Has the tenant failed to comply with their obligations?

A 14-day notice to remedy was served on the tenant on 6 December 2024.
While some improvement is evidenced, there remain considerable breaches that must be remedied by the tenant, or alternatively by the landlord if not completed by the tenant in the time allowed.
The tenant may consider some installations/items as art but that is a subjective assessment. The landlord has provided sufficient evidence to justify the work orders as made in this order, especially in the common areas where the tenant has no right to place items as he does.
Given some tenant improvements made since the previous order, and having reviewed the recent photos, I have reduced the monetary limit to $3,000.00. An April 2025 contractor quote for $3,758.52 was provided by the landlord. The cap set reflects a possible lower cost but I acknowledge the final cost may be greater, especially if the tenant is not cooperative or responsive. If so, any higher costs incurred, if not accepted by the tenant, can be sought for recovery via a further landlord application.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5183356 — Smoke alarms at Unit/Flat Flat 3, 5 Weka Street, The Wood, Nelson 7010

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5183356 — Smoke alarms at Unit/Flat Flat 3, 5 Weka Street, The Wood, Nelson 7010

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Has the tenant failed to comply with their obligations?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Has the tenant failed to comply with their obligations?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions