What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5335260 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tenancy at 37E Hindmarsh Street, Johnsonville, is terminated from 5pm

How much money was awarded in case 5335260?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5335260?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5335260?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12414972-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5335260 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tenancy at 37E Hindmarsh Street, Johnsonville, is terminated from 5pm

How much money was awarded in case 5335260?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5335260?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5335260?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12414972-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

37E Hindmarsh Street, Johnsonville, Wellington 6037 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5335260 — Harassment

Order

The Tenancy at 37E Hindmarsh Street, Johnsonville, is terminated from 5pm on 30 September 2025.

Reasons

Ms White attended the hearing. Mr Riley did not, although Ms White indicated that he had emailed her shortly before the hearing and agreed to the tenancy ending on 30 September 2025. However, she still asked that the issue of the termination was heard and decided by the Tribunal to provide certainty. I allowed a brief delay to allow for lateness, but when Mr Riley remained absent, I decided to proceed. I am satisfied that Mr Riley is aware of the application and the hearing date and time.
The landlord has applied to the Tribunal for an order terminating the periodic tenancy on the grounds of anti-social behaviour from the tenant.
The landlord states that following instances of anti-social behaviour have occurred: a. 11 August 2025 – Mr Riley was involved in a loud argument at 3.40am, involving threats of violence, a neighbour called Police; b. 18 August 2025 – Mr Riley was heard yelling and screaming at his partner at 4am, with a report of items being thrown and banging that lasted an hour, Police were called by a neighbour; c. 26 August 2025 – Mr Riley was involved in a loud argument with his partner at 7am, before locking her out, the argument continued for a prolonged period, Police were called by neighbours; d. 10 September 2025 – neighbours report that alcohol bottles and used nappies were dumped in their recycling bin by Mr Riley; and e. 15 September 2025 – Mr Riley was yelling and screaming at 4am and 6am, waking neighbours.
For each of these instances anti-social behaviour notices were issued to Mr Riley. For the first three instances’ notices were sent on 29 August 2025, for the fourth instance a notice was sent on 10 September 2025, and for the fifth instance, a notice was sent on 15 September 2025.
On 28 August 2025, Ms White applied to the Tribunal for termination.
Subject to certain considerations, the Tribunal must make an order terminating the tenancy if it is satisfied: a. on 3 separate occasions within a 90-day period the tenant, or a person in the premises with the tenant’s permission, engaged in anti-social behaviour in connection with the tenancy; and b. on each occasion the landlord gave the tenant written notice— i. describing clearly which specific behaviour was considered to be anti-social and (if known to the landlord) who engaged in it; and ii. advising the tenant of the date, approximate time, and location of the behaviour; and iii. stating how many other notices (if any) the landlord has given the tenant under this paragraph in connection with the same tenancy and the same 90-day period; and iv. advising the tenant of the tenant’s right to make an application to the Tribunal challenging the notice and; c. the landlord’s application to the Tribunal was made within 28 days after the landlord gave the third notice.
The Act confirms that antisocial behaviour includes harassment or any act (whether intentional or not) that reasonably causes alarm, distress or nuisance that is more than minor.
I have determined that the landlord has established that anti-social behaviour has occurred on the premises by the tenant. The landlord has served notices on the tenant as required in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, and the application to the Tribunal was made within 28 days of the date of the third notice.
I consider it would not be unfair to terminate the tenancy taking into account the circumstances in which the behaviour arose and the notices were given. I cannot see that the landlord has acted in any retaliatory way in bringing this application.
I cannot consider the impact on the tenant, in making an order for termination of the tenancy.
For the reasons stated above I conclude that the requirements of s55A RTA are made out and order termination. Ms White has asked that this occurs on 340 September 2025, and I make the order effective from that date.
Ms White also brought applications on the basis that Mr Riley having a dog against the requirements of the lease, and leaving rubbish around the tenancy were breaches incapable of remedy. As discussed with her these actions may be breaches, but both can be remedied, and so that aspect of the application was not made out.

Order

The Tenancy at 37E Hindmarsh Street, Johnsonville, is terminated from 5pm on 30 September 2025.

Reasons

Ms White attended the hearing. Mr Riley did not, although Ms White indicated that he had emailed her shortly before the hearing and agreed to the tenancy ending on 30 September 2025. However, she still asked that the issue of the termination was heard and decided by the Tribunal to provide certainty. I allowed a brief delay to allow for lateness, but when Mr Riley remained absent, I decided to proceed. I am satisfied that Mr Riley is aware of the application and the hearing date and time.
The landlord has applied to the Tribunal for an order terminating the periodic tenancy on the grounds of anti-social behaviour from the tenant.
The landlord states that following instances of anti-social behaviour have occurred: a. 11 August 2025 – Mr Riley was involved in a loud argument at 3.40am, involving threats of violence, a neighbour called Police; b. 18 August 2025 – Mr Riley was heard yelling and screaming at his partner at 4am, with a report of items being thrown and banging that lasted an hour, Police were called by a neighbour; c. 26 August 2025 – Mr Riley was involved in a loud argument with his partner at 7am, before locking her out, the argument continued for a prolonged period, Police were called by neighbours; d. 10 September 2025 – neighbours report that alcohol bottles and used nappies were dumped in their recycling bin by Mr Riley; and e. 15 September 2025 – Mr Riley was yelling and screaming at 4am and 6am, waking neighbours.
For each of these instances anti-social behaviour notices were issued to Mr Riley. For the first three instances’ notices were sent on 29 August 2025, for the fourth instance a notice was sent on 10 September 2025, and for the fifth instance, a notice was sent on 15 September 2025.
On 28 August 2025, Ms White applied to the Tribunal for termination.
Subject to certain considerations, the Tribunal must make an order terminating the tenancy if it is satisfied: a. on 3 separate occasions within a 90-day period the tenant, or a person in the premises with the tenant’s permission, engaged in anti-social behaviour in connection with the tenancy; and b. on each occasion the landlord gave the tenant written notice— i. describing clearly which specific behaviour was considered to be anti-social and (if known to the landlord) who engaged in it; and ii. advising the tenant of the date, approximate time, and location of the behaviour; and iii. stating how many other notices (if any) the landlord has given the tenant under this paragraph in connection with the same tenancy and the same 90-day period; and iv. advising the tenant of the tenant’s right to make an application to the Tribunal challenging the notice and; c. the landlord’s application to the Tribunal was made within 28 days after the landlord gave the third notice.
The Act confirms that antisocial behaviour includes harassment or any act (whether intentional or not) that reasonably causes alarm, distress or nuisance that is more than minor.
I have determined that the landlord has established that anti-social behaviour has occurred on the premises by the tenant. The landlord has served notices on the tenant as required in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, and the application to the Tribunal was made within 28 days of the date of the third notice.
I consider it would not be unfair to terminate the tenancy taking into account the circumstances in which the behaviour arose and the notices were given. I cannot see that the landlord has acted in any retaliatory way in bringing this application.
I cannot consider the impact on the tenant, in making an order for termination of the tenancy.
For the reasons stated above I conclude that the requirements of s55A RTA are made out and order termination. Ms White has asked that this occurs on 340 September 2025, and I make the order effective from that date.
Ms White also brought applications on the basis that Mr Riley having a dog against the requirements of the lease, and leaving rubbish around the tenancy were breaches incapable of remedy. As discussed with her these actions may be breaches, but both can be remedied, and so that aspect of the application was not made out.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5335260 — Harassment at 37E Hindmarsh Street, Johnsonville, Wellington 6037

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5335260 — Harassment at 37E Hindmarsh Street, Johnsonville, Wellington 6037

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.