What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5338182 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

How much money was awarded in case 5338182?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5338182?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5338182?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12573490-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5338182 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

How much money was awarded in case 5338182?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5338182?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5338182?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12573490-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5338182 — 14-day notice

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name and identifying details.
The tenancy of Siosifa Pailate at [Tenancy address suppressed] is terminated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at 3pm on the 16 October 2025.
I grant leave for the possession order to be enforced immediately on the grounds that there is a risk to the security to the property if enforcement is delayed.
The Bond is to remain in the bond centre.

Reasons

The landlord and their agents attended today’s hearing. Neither the tenant nor a representative for the tenant attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the tenant’s obligations.

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 not capable of remedy, the landlord is not expressly required to serve a 14-day breach notice on the tenant. A breach is not capable to remedy where the thing done, or its effect, cannot be undone.
However, unless the breach is serious, the Tribunal usually requires the landlord to have warned the tenant about the likely consequences of continued breach before it will exercise its discretion to terminate.
The tenant has breached their obligations by: a. Breaching s 40(2)(c) RTA by breaching the quiet enjoyment of their neighbours. Early in the morning on the 22 May 2025 the Police attended the premises to apprehend a person who had a warrant out for their arrest. The person the Police were looking for was found at the premises but refused to come out of the premises and claimed to have a firearm. The Police then had a stand off with the person in the property for about 7 hours. During this time there was up to 20 armed Police at the property, dog squads and the Police helicopter. The landlord had phone calls, emails and texts from distressed and frightened neighbours. The Police had to gain access to the house using force and when the person was apprehended, the Police located large quantities of illicit drugs. b. Breaching s40(2)(b) RTA by using the property for an unlawful purpose namely having large quantities of illicit drugs found at the property on the 22 May 2025. c. Breaching s40(2)(c) RTA on the 4 September 2025 by occupants of the house doing burnouts on the road outside the house. The neighbours sent texts to the landlord about the issue, saying again that they frightened and upset and send a photograph of the burnouts. d. Breaching s 40(2)(c) RTA by the tenant physically assaulting his partner on the front lawn on the 31 August 2025. Again, the neighbours notified the landlord expressing concern and distress. The Police attended and the landlord understands that the tenant was taken into custody on this day. Note that the assault of another occupant at the property is grounds for immediate termination pursuant to s55 (1)(c)(iv) RTA.
The breach is not capable of remedy because it involves very serious anti-social behaviour that once done cannot be undone. The neighbours have been left upset frightened and traumatised from the behaviour. I have seen a number of texts sent to the landlord from several neighbours, they show that that the neighbours were considerably affected by the behaviour of the people living at the tenancy premises and were frightened in their own homes.
One neighbour sent a message to the landlords on the 4 September that said “When will this end, your house is ruining our area...” I do not think that the text was an overstatement. The behaviour of these tenants had clearly made life very difficult for their neighbours.
I have also seen a statement from the Police, that statement makes it clear that the events of 22 May 2025 were very serious and would have been frightening for the people in the neighbourhood.
It would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy. The tenant is currently in custody. The behaviour at the property is antisocial and serious. The landlord has asked the tenant to leave and he has refused. The landlord tells me that no rent has been paid since the 2 September.
I understand that the tenant’s family are living in the property. They will need to leave. Possession order can be enforced immediately.
Usually, a possession order cannot be enforced (an eviction actioned) until 48 hours after the order is made. However, I can grant leave for the order to be enforced immediately; see section 138(1) of the District Court Act 2016. Section 106(2) RTA states that s 138(1) applies as if the reference to a District Court Judge, were a reference to a Tenancy Adjudicator.
The landlord may make an immediate application for an eviction warrant to have bailiff and/or police assistance to obtain possession, if required. Bond
The bond is to remain in the bond centre. The landlord is likely to file a further claim for vacated damages once it takes possession back.

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name and identifying details.
The tenancy of Siosifa Pailate at [Tenancy address suppressed] is terminated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at 3pm on the 16 October 2025.
I grant leave for the possession order to be enforced immediately on the grounds that there is a risk to the security to the property if enforcement is delayed.
The Bond is to remain in the bond centre.

Reasons

The landlord and their agents attended today’s hearing. Neither the tenant nor a representative for the tenant attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the tenant’s obligations.

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 not capable of remedy, the landlord is not expressly required to serve a 14-day breach notice on the tenant. A breach is not capable to remedy where the thing done, or its effect, cannot be undone.
However, unless the breach is serious, the Tribunal usually requires the landlord to have warned the tenant about the likely consequences of continued breach before it will exercise its discretion to terminate.
The tenant has breached their obligations by: a. Breaching s 40(2)(c) RTA by breaching the quiet enjoyment of their neighbours. Early in the morning on the 22 May 2025 the Police attended the premises to apprehend a person who had a warrant out for their arrest. The person the Police were looking for was found at the premises but refused to come out of the premises and claimed to have a firearm. The Police then had a stand off with the person in the property for about 7 hours. During this time there was up to 20 armed Police at the property, dog squads and the Police helicopter. The landlord had phone calls, emails and texts from distressed and frightened neighbours. The Police had to gain access to the house using force and when the person was apprehended, the Police located large quantities of illicit drugs. b. Breaching s40(2)(b) RTA by using the property for an unlawful purpose namely having large quantities of illicit drugs found at the property on the 22 May 2025. c. Breaching s40(2)(c) RTA on the 4 September 2025 by occupants of the house doing burnouts on the road outside the house. The neighbours sent texts to the landlord about the issue, saying again that they frightened and upset and send a photograph of the burnouts. d. Breaching s 40(2)(c) RTA by the tenant physically assaulting his partner on the front lawn on the 31 August 2025. Again, the neighbours notified the landlord expressing concern and distress. The Police attended and the landlord understands that the tenant was taken into custody on this day. Note that the assault of another occupant at the property is grounds for immediate termination pursuant to s55 (1)(c)(iv) RTA.
The breach is not capable of remedy because it involves very serious anti-social behaviour that once done cannot be undone. The neighbours have been left upset frightened and traumatised from the behaviour. I have seen a number of texts sent to the landlord from several neighbours, they show that that the neighbours were considerably affected by the behaviour of the people living at the tenancy premises and were frightened in their own homes.
One neighbour sent a message to the landlords on the 4 September that said “When will this end, your house is ruining our area...” I do not think that the text was an overstatement. The behaviour of these tenants had clearly made life very difficult for their neighbours.
I have also seen a statement from the Police, that statement makes it clear that the events of 22 May 2025 were very serious and would have been frightening for the people in the neighbourhood.
It would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy. The tenant is currently in custody. The behaviour at the property is antisocial and serious. The landlord has asked the tenant to leave and he has refused. The landlord tells me that no rent has been paid since the 2 September.
I understand that the tenant’s family are living in the property. They will need to leave. Possession order can be enforced immediately.
Usually, a possession order cannot be enforced (an eviction actioned) until 48 hours after the order is made. However, I can grant leave for the order to be enforced immediately; see section 138(1) of the District Court Act 2016. Section 106(2) RTA states that s 138(1) applies as if the reference to a District Court Judge, were a reference to a Tenancy Adjudicator.
The landlord may make an immediate application for an eviction warrant to have bailiff and/or police assistance to obtain possession, if required. Bond
The bond is to remain in the bond centre. The landlord is likely to file a further claim for vacated damages once it takes possession back.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5338182 — 14-day notice

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5338182 — 14-day notice

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions