What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5212851 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 5212851?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5212851?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5212851?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11901446-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5212851 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 5212851?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5212851?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5212851?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11901446-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

2A Gregory Avenue, Islington, Christchurch 8042 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5212851 — Rent arrears

Order

The Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenants have applied for compensation for a breach of quiet enjoyment/privacy by the landlord. Background
The landlord owns 2 properties one in front of the other.
One of the properties has been rented by Ms Hope’s relative for about 20 years. When the other property became vacant the landlord rented it to the tenants based on the recommendation of Ms Hope’s relative.
The tenancy started on 23 September 2024 and ended on 7 April 2025.
The tenants fell behind with their rent. The landlord was unable to contact them so asked their other tenant if she knew where Ms Hope was so they could discuss the rent arrears issue with her.
Ms Hope’s relative told the landlord that Ms Hope was staying with her grandmother, their joint relative, and gave the landlord the address.
The landlord went to Ms Hope’s grandmother’s property. In evidence, the landlord said they had an amicable discussion with Ms Hope and her grandmother, and they agreed on a date when the tenancy would end.
Ms Hope’s relative (the neighbouring tenant) put a message on Facebook asking whether anyone knew where the tenants were. She said: They are owing money and don’t bother coming back to the house...I know they have friends and family on here to pass it on. Its hard to contact people that lie and run away from their problems...
Ms Hope says that she was assaulted by some of her family after that post because they were embarrassed about the contents in the post. She suffered injuries for which she required treatment. The alleged assault is now the subject of a police complaint and investigation.
It is against that background that the tenant seeks compensation for a breach of her quiet enjoyment and privacy. Relevant law
The relevant law is set out in section 38 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA). That section states in part: 38 Quiet enjoyment (1) The tenant shall be entitled to have quiet enjoyment of the premises without interruption by the landlord or any person claiming by, through, or under the landlord or having superior title to that of the landlord. (2) The landlord shall not cause or permit any interference with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of the tenant in the use of the premises by the tenant.
Section 45 RTA sets out a landlord’s responsibilities. The relevant part of section 45 is this: 45 Landlord’s responsibilities (1) The landlord shall— (e) take 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. Discussion
That Ms Hope’s relative assaulted her after learning that she had rent arrears is not a matter that falls under the Tribunal’s jurisdiction. The alleged assault is a matter for the police to investigate.
The tenants’ allegation is that the landlord breached their quiet enjoyment and privacy by mentioning the rent arrears to Ms Hope’s relative, also one of the landlord’s tenants.
There are 2 reasons why the tenants’ application cannot succeed. First, any action the landlord took was not in relation to ‘the use of the premises’ by their tenants. Both sections 38 and 45 RTA reference a breach of quiet enjoyment and interference with the tenant’s reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy to the use of the premises.
Second, the landlord’s actions were not objectively unreasonable. The tenants were in arrears with their rent. They would not communicate with the landlord. The landlord could not locate them.
Given that it was Ms Hope’s relative, a long-time tenant of the landlord’s, who recommended them for the tenancy, it was reasonable for the landlord to enquire whether she knew how they could contact the tenants.
Ms Hope’s relative suggested that the landlord visit Ms Hope’s grandmother as she knew she was living there. That is what they did. As a result, the tenancy ended by agreement after what the landlord described as a friendly meeting. They were welcomed in by Ms Hope’s grandmother.
Ms Hope appears to link her assault to the landlord’s action. But there is no link. It was her relative who wrote the Facebook post, and it was a relative who allegedly assaulted her. The landlord had no control over any of that.
The tenants’ application is misconceived. There is no reasonable basis on which the Tribunal could award the tenants compensation for any breach by the landlord. Result
The application is dismissed. The tenants have not proved any breach by the landlord of their quiet enjoyment, or of the landlord’s responsibility under section 45(1)(e) RTA. Name suppression
The tenants sought a name suppression order. They are not entitled to name suppression as the application is unsuccessful. I have ordered suppression of the landlord’s name as their defence is successful – see section 95A RTA.

Order

The Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenants have applied for compensation for a breach of quiet enjoyment/privacy by the landlord. Background
The landlord owns 2 properties one in front of the other.
One of the properties has been rented by Ms Hope’s relative for about 20 years. When the other property became vacant the landlord rented it to the tenants based on the recommendation of Ms Hope’s relative.
The tenancy started on 23 September 2024 and ended on 7 April 2025.
The tenants fell behind with their rent. The landlord was unable to contact them so asked their other tenant if she knew where Ms Hope was so they could discuss the rent arrears issue with her.
Ms Hope’s relative told the landlord that Ms Hope was staying with her grandmother, their joint relative, and gave the landlord the address.
The landlord went to Ms Hope’s grandmother’s property. In evidence, the landlord said they had an amicable discussion with Ms Hope and her grandmother, and they agreed on a date when the tenancy would end.
Ms Hope’s relative (the neighbouring tenant) put a message on Facebook asking whether anyone knew where the tenants were. She said: They are owing money and don’t bother coming back to the house...I know they have friends and family on here to pass it on. Its hard to contact people that lie and run away from their problems...
Ms Hope says that she was assaulted by some of her family after that post because they were embarrassed about the contents in the post. She suffered injuries for which she required treatment. The alleged assault is now the subject of a police complaint and investigation.
It is against that background that the tenant seeks compensation for a breach of her quiet enjoyment and privacy. Relevant law
The relevant law is set out in section 38 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA). That section states in part: 38 Quiet enjoyment (1) The tenant shall be entitled to have quiet enjoyment of the premises without interruption by the landlord or any person claiming by, through, or under the landlord or having superior title to that of the landlord. (2) The landlord shall not cause or permit any interference with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of the tenant in the use of the premises by the tenant.
Section 45 RTA sets out a landlord’s responsibilities. The relevant part of section 45 is this: 45 Landlord’s responsibilities (1) The landlord shall— (e) take 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. Discussion
That Ms Hope’s relative assaulted her after learning that she had rent arrears is not a matter that falls under the Tribunal’s jurisdiction. The alleged assault is a matter for the police to investigate.
The tenants’ allegation is that the landlord breached their quiet enjoyment and privacy by mentioning the rent arrears to Ms Hope’s relative, also one of the landlord’s tenants.
There are 2 reasons why the tenants’ application cannot succeed. First, any action the landlord took was not in relation to ‘the use of the premises’ by their tenants. Both sections 38 and 45 RTA reference a breach of quiet enjoyment and interference with the tenant’s reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy to the use of the premises.
Second, the landlord’s actions were not objectively unreasonable. The tenants were in arrears with their rent. They would not communicate with the landlord. The landlord could not locate them.
Given that it was Ms Hope’s relative, a long-time tenant of the landlord’s, who recommended them for the tenancy, it was reasonable for the landlord to enquire whether she knew how they could contact the tenants.
Ms Hope’s relative suggested that the landlord visit Ms Hope’s grandmother as she knew she was living there. That is what they did. As a result, the tenancy ended by agreement after what the landlord described as a friendly meeting. They were welcomed in by Ms Hope’s grandmother.
Ms Hope appears to link her assault to the landlord’s action. But there is no link. It was her relative who wrote the Facebook post, and it was a relative who allegedly assaulted her. The landlord had no control over any of that.
The tenants’ application is misconceived. There is no reasonable basis on which the Tribunal could award the tenants compensation for any breach by the landlord. Result
The application is dismissed. The tenants have not proved any breach by the landlord of their quiet enjoyment, or of the landlord’s responsibility under section 45(1)(e) RTA. Name suppression
The tenants sought a name suppression order. They are not entitled to name suppression as the application is unsuccessful. I have ordered suppression of the landlord’s name as their defence is successful – see section 95A RTA.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5212851 — Rent arrears at 2A Gregory Avenue, Islington, Christchurch 8042

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5212851 — Rent arrears at 2A Gregory Avenue, Islington, Christchurch 8042

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