Published tribunal order
Tenancy Tribunal case 5240711 — 14-day notice
Decided 25 Aug 2025 · Published 25 Aug 2025 · Application 5240711
- 14-day notice
- Mould & damp
Party names are redacted in the official published order.
Order
- An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and of the tenancy address.
- [The tenant/s] agrees to fully dismantle (remove) the below structures (located at the tenancy address) by 12 noon on Monday 21 July 2025:- a. The carport (on the driveway with wooden framing and clearlight roof and side); b. Storage shed #1 (the long structure built along the boundary fence from behind the garage); c. Storage shed #2 (the smaller shed built beside the back steps); d. Washing line cover (built over the washing line); e. Front porch cover (glass window and roof sheeting attached to the front deck).
- If the tenant fails to comply with any of Orders 2a, 2b, 2c, 2d or 2e by the date specified in Order 2 above, then the landlord may undertake the work and charge the tenant the costs of this work up to the amounts listed for each structure as below:- a. The carport: $2,100.00; b. Storage shed #1: $2,000.00; c. Storage shed #2: $615.00; d. Washing line cover: $430.00; e. Front porch cover: $530.00. These costs may be treated as rent in arrears and enforced accordingly.
- The application for a conditional termination order is dismissed.
Reasons
- Both parties attended the hearing held by telephone on 10 June 2025.
- The reason for the landlord applying to the Tenancy Tribunal is because it says that the tenant has built five large structures at the property without obtaining the landlord’s consent for these.
- The landlord wants the tenant to remove all of the structures because it says they:- a. Do not comply with the Building Code (a building law) which sets rules for making sure structures are safe and durable; and b. May be unsafe for the tenant and other occupants or visitors; and c. May be causing damage to the house or boundary fence or other parts of the property.
- The landlord also wants the Tribunal to make an order stating that if the tenant does not remove the structures, the tenancy will terminate.
What does the law say about structures or renovations at tenancy properties?
- The law that applies to tenancies is the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
- The RTA law says in one of its sections (section 42) that a tenant is not allowed to fix anything to the tenancy property or make any renovation, alteration, or addition to the premises without first obtaining the written consent of the landlord.
- It is a breach of the law if a tenant does this.
- If a tenant does ask the landlord to consent to a proposed structure or other renovation, the landlord cannot unreasonably refuse consent, but it can put reasonable conditions on the consent. For example, that any work complies with the building code and that a building consent is obtained, if it is needed.
- The law does allow tenants to make “minor changes” to tenancy premises, but they must still get landlord consent first; see s42B RTA.
- The five structures are not minor changes. Some of them have been attached to the house which may compromise it’s weathertightness, some probably require a building consent, and others may not be easy to remove.
- The landlord says the tenant did not obtain written consent before he put up the structures. The tenant agrees that he didn’t. This means the tenant has breached the law. What does the law say about terminating tenancies because a tenant breaches the law or tenancy agreement?
- The law says the Tenancy Tribunal may terminate a tenancy if the type of breach, or the seriousness of it, means it would be unfair to refuse to end the tenancy. 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 (and give them a reasonable time to do that which cannot be less than 14 days) and prove the tenant has failed to do so.
- The landlord gave [The tenant/s] a notice dated 7 March 2025 which required him to remove the structures.
- It applied to the Tribunal on 17 April 2025 because they had not been removed.
- The structures are still at the property, so the tenant has not remedied the breach.
- The landlord also must satisfy me that it would be inequitable (unfair) to refuse to terminate the tenancy.
- I do not agree to make a termination order.
- This is because the tenant says the structures have been at the property for about 5 years, and he says he has not been asked to remove them until the last 3 months. Also, this is a very long tenancy of 26 years.
- I consider the breaches can be dealt with by work orders and allowing the landlord to have the work done and charge the tenant for it if it is not done. Agreement to remove the structures
- [The tenant/s] agrees to remove the structures now that he knows that he is not legally allowed to have them because he did not get landlord consent first.
- He said he has spoken to [City] Council staff who told him it would be expensive to fix the carport to make it comply with the council rules.
- I have made an order recording that the tenant agrees to remove the structures. Work orders
- I allowed the landlord and [The tenant/s] time after the hearing to agree on a date by which the structures must be removed.
- They have agreed on a date of Monday 21 July 2025.
- I also directed the landlord to provide at least two quotes for the cost to dismantle each of the structures. The landlord has provided these quotes.
- The Tribunal may make work orders requiring a tenant to remedy a breach.
- 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. 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.
- I have now made final work orders requiring the tenant to dismantle the five structures by the date agreed and that if he does not do so, the landlord may undertake the work and charge the tenant up to the amounts specified. Suppression of names and address
- The landlord has been partially successful in its application. The tenant has consented to the work orders.
- The landlord is the government social housing provider so there is a high public interest in its identity and actions. I have decided the public interest outweighs any interest in suppressing the landlord’s name. The landlord’s name is not suppressed.
- The tenant has consented to the work orders and cooperated with the Tribunal process. I accept his explanation that he built the structures gradually and was not aware that he should not be doing so without obtaining the landlord’s consent in advance. It may jeopardise his privacy and/or future tenancy prospects to publish his name and address. These are both suppressed.