What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5314200 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at 20 Alma Place, Shirley, Christchurch 8061 is

How much money was awarded in case 5314200?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5314200?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5314200?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12481164-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5314200 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at 20 Alma Place, Shirley, Christchurch 8061 is

How much money was awarded in case 5314200?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5314200?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5314200?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12481164-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

20 Alma Place, Shirley, Christchurch 8061 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5314200 — 14-day notice

Order

The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at 20 Alma Place, Shirley, Christchurch 8061 is terminated, and possession is granted to Otautahi Community Housing Trust, at 5pm on Monday, 13 October 2025.
[The tenant/s] must pay Otautahi Community Housing Trust $28.00 immediately, being the filing fee on this application.

Reasons

The landlord attended a hearing on 9 September 2025. The tenant did not attend. Background
The landlord had applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the tenant’s obligations. The tenant has breached their obligations by failing to keep the premises reasonably clean and tidy.
The landlord served a 14-day notice on the tenant on 28 February 2025. The landlord had not been able to obtain evidence to establish that the tenant did not remedy the breach within the required period. The landlord claimed that the tenant has refused to allow access to the premises.
A landlord may enter the premises during the tenancy with the tenant's consent, in an emergency, or after giving the required notice for inspections and repairs and maintenance. See section 48(1) and (2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
When the proper notice has been given, tenant consent is not required for a landlord to gain access and complete an inspection. The correct legal position was recorded in a letter from Otautahi Community Housing Trust to Ms Gulland on 12 July 2023, which stated: “If you are not at home when I visit, we will access your home using our mater key. Please accept this letter as 48 hour notice of our inspection as per Section 48(2)(b) of the residential Tenancies Act.”
Since issuing the 14-day notice in February 2025, Otautahi Community Housing Trust has issued notices to the tenant for inspections but has not exercised its right of entry when the tenant has requested date changes, or said she is unwell, or simply said she does not want the inspection done. The landlord has tried to work with the tenant to facilitate access, but those attempts have been rebuffed or ignored.
The landlord wished to have entry to assess the current state of cleanliness of the premises, and to provide further evidence in these proceedings. It is entitled to inspect the premises.
Considering that background, hearing was adjourned for Otautahi Community Housing Trust to conduct an inspection at the premises and to provide evidence of the current condition of the property. The following directions were made: a. Otautahi Community Housing Trust will inspect the premises on Friday, 12 September 2025 between 10:30am and 11:30am. 1 b. Following the inspection Otautahi Community Housing Trust will provide the Tribunal with any additional evidence and submissions by 5pm on Wednesday, 17 September 2025. c. Ms Gulland may provide any evidence or submissions in response to the application and further evidence by 3pm on Friday, 26 September 2025. d. Once both parties have provided evidence and/or submission I will decide the application “on the papers”. e. If either party fails to provide further evidence and/or submission by the dates specified in paragraphs 3 & 4 above, the hearing will be treated as complete and the final order issued by the Tribunal.
Otautahi Community Housing Trust advised the Tribunal that, again, Ms Gulland attempted to defer the inspection and, again, the landlord accommodated that. An inspection was finally done by Otautahi Community Housing Trust exercising its right of entry (after notice) on Tuesday 16 September 2025.
Otautahi Community Housing Trust has provided evidence of the current condition of the premises. Ms Gulland was not home during the inspection and has not provided any evidence or submissions to the Tribunal.

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 tenant has breached their obligations by failing to keep the premises reasonably clean and tidy. The landlord provided photographs which show the property in a very poor state, unclean and probably unsanitary.
The landlord served a 14-day notice on the tenant on 28 February 2025, and the tenant did not remedy the breach within the required period.
The current photographs provided by the landlord show that the condition of the premises has deteriorated. The photographs establish that this is a long- standing issue with no cleaning or rubbish removal having taken place for months. The lack of cleaning and hygiene is causing damage to the premises, I refer to photographs of the oven, kitchen cabinetry, toilet, shower, and floor coverings. There is also evidence of rodent infestation.
This situation is extreme. It is among the worst examples of a tenant breaching the obligation to keep premises reasonably clean, that I have seen. The conditions cannot be sanitary or healthy for the tenant, or her neighbours. There is an accumulation of food waste, waste running down the fronts of cupboards and the shower, oven and toilet appear unusable. The landlord has attempted to provide support to the tenant, but that has not been accepted by the tenant.
It would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy because of the damage being caused to the premises and the lack of engagement by the tenant. I also take account of the effect of this lack of hygiene on other tenants. These premises adjoin other units, and other tenants have provided evidence to the landlord of the rodents (running across the back of curtains) within this dwelling.
The tenancy is terminated, at 5pm on Monday 13 October 2025.
As the landlord was the successful party, I also award reimbursement of the Tribunal application fee.

Order

The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at 20 Alma Place, Shirley, Christchurch 8061 is terminated, and possession is granted to Otautahi Community Housing Trust, at 5pm on Monday, 13 October 2025.
[The tenant/s] must pay Otautahi Community Housing Trust $28.00 immediately, being the filing fee on this application.

Reasons

The landlord attended a hearing on 9 September 2025. The tenant did not attend. Background
The landlord had applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the tenant’s obligations. The tenant has breached their obligations by failing to keep the premises reasonably clean and tidy.
The landlord served a 14-day notice on the tenant on 28 February 2025. The landlord had not been able to obtain evidence to establish that the tenant did not remedy the breach within the required period. The landlord claimed that the tenant has refused to allow access to the premises.
A landlord may enter the premises during the tenancy with the tenant's consent, in an emergency, or after giving the required notice for inspections and repairs and maintenance. See section 48(1) and (2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
When the proper notice has been given, tenant consent is not required for a landlord to gain access and complete an inspection. The correct legal position was recorded in a letter from Otautahi Community Housing Trust to Ms Gulland on 12 July 2023, which stated: “If you are not at home when I visit, we will access your home using our mater key. Please accept this letter as 48 hour notice of our inspection as per Section 48(2)(b) of the residential Tenancies Act.”
Since issuing the 14-day notice in February 2025, Otautahi Community Housing Trust has issued notices to the tenant for inspections but has not exercised its right of entry when the tenant has requested date changes, or said she is unwell, or simply said she does not want the inspection done. The landlord has tried to work with the tenant to facilitate access, but those attempts have been rebuffed or ignored.
The landlord wished to have entry to assess the current state of cleanliness of the premises, and to provide further evidence in these proceedings. It is entitled to inspect the premises.
Considering that background, hearing was adjourned for Otautahi Community Housing Trust to conduct an inspection at the premises and to provide evidence of the current condition of the property. The following directions were made: a. Otautahi Community Housing Trust will inspect the premises on Friday, 12 September 2025 between 10:30am and 11:30am. 1 b. Following the inspection Otautahi Community Housing Trust will provide the Tribunal with any additional evidence and submissions by 5pm on Wednesday, 17 September 2025. c. Ms Gulland may provide any evidence or submissions in response to the application and further evidence by 3pm on Friday, 26 September 2025. d. Once both parties have provided evidence and/or submission I will decide the application “on the papers”. e. If either party fails to provide further evidence and/or submission by the dates specified in paragraphs 3 & 4 above, the hearing will be treated as complete and the final order issued by the Tribunal.
Otautahi Community Housing Trust advised the Tribunal that, again, Ms Gulland attempted to defer the inspection and, again, the landlord accommodated that. An inspection was finally done by Otautahi Community Housing Trust exercising its right of entry (after notice) on Tuesday 16 September 2025.
Otautahi Community Housing Trust has provided evidence of the current condition of the premises. Ms Gulland was not home during the inspection and has not provided any evidence or submissions to the Tribunal.

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 tenant has breached their obligations by failing to keep the premises reasonably clean and tidy. The landlord provided photographs which show the property in a very poor state, unclean and probably unsanitary.
The landlord served a 14-day notice on the tenant on 28 February 2025, and the tenant did not remedy the breach within the required period.
The current photographs provided by the landlord show that the condition of the premises has deteriorated. The photographs establish that this is a long- standing issue with no cleaning or rubbish removal having taken place for months. The lack of cleaning and hygiene is causing damage to the premises, I refer to photographs of the oven, kitchen cabinetry, toilet, shower, and floor coverings. There is also evidence of rodent infestation.
This situation is extreme. It is among the worst examples of a tenant breaching the obligation to keep premises reasonably clean, that I have seen. The conditions cannot be sanitary or healthy for the tenant, or her neighbours. There is an accumulation of food waste, waste running down the fronts of cupboards and the shower, oven and toilet appear unusable. The landlord has attempted to provide support to the tenant, but that has not been accepted by the tenant.
It would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy because of the damage being caused to the premises and the lack of engagement by the tenant. I also take account of the effect of this lack of hygiene on other tenants. These premises adjoin other units, and other tenants have provided evidence to the landlord of the rodents (running across the back of curtains) within this dwelling.
The tenancy is terminated, at 5pm on Monday 13 October 2025.
As the landlord was the successful party, I also award reimbursement of the Tribunal application fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5314200 — 14-day notice at 20 Alma Place, Shirley, Christchurch 8061

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5314200 — 14-day notice at 20 Alma Place, Shirley, Christchurch 8061

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions