What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5341875 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 5341875?

Compensation: $2,500.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5341875?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5341875?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13125060-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5341875 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 5341875?

Compensation: $2,500.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5341875?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5341875?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13125060-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5341875 — Tenancy dispute

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5341875 — net $2,528.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Compensation	$2,500.00	Compensation
Net award	$2,528.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$2,528.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.
Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities must pay [The tenant/s] $2,528.00 immediately.

Reasons

Both tenants attended the hearing. Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities
The tenants seek compensation and exemplary damages for permitting interference with their reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy in the use of the premises, and for not taking 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.
The tenants live in unit 1 in a block of four units, who all share a driveway and have allocated parking and exclusive use areas in front of their garages. Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities is the landlord of the tenant applicants and the tenants in unit 2.
The tenants stated that they have ongoing and escalating issues with the occupants and tenants of unit 2 including, a) blocking the shared driveway, b) parking in their parking space, c) ongoing antisocial behaviour, d) domestic violence, e) drug use and f) threats to property.
In support of this the tenants provided to the Tribunal a) A timeline of 38 attempts to communicate with the landlord about these issues, from 22 January 2025 to 10 February 2026, being the day before the hearing b) Recordings from security cameras that had been supplied to the landlord of parking incidents, violence, probable drug use and threats.
A least 7 videos were shown at the hearing detailing parking by unit 2 tenants in the common driveway. Some showed repairmen being unable to access the back units and one where the tenant could not drive out to work.
Other videos showed domestic abuse between unit 2 occupants and visitors and probable drug use.
One video recorded a threat from a visitor to unit 2 to the applicants that they would “smash their camera”.
The tenants said that their peace and security were being breached and they were being harassed by the occupants and visitors of unit 2.
The tenants said that they are worn out and feel that no one is listening to them when they have reached out for help and that is why they came to the Tribunal.
The landlord acknowledged that the tenant had sent communications including multiple emails to them but that they weren’t saved into the central repository in the system. Some of the emails were responded to but because they had not all been saved into the central repository Ms Thompson-wise was only aware of all the correspondence on the day of the hearing and said that this was a downfall on her part.
The landlord issued 2 breach notices to the tenants in unit 2, on 26 May 2025 and 14 August 2025 warning them that they had breached their responsibilities under section 40(2)(c) and to ’be aware of the impact that the behaviour has on your neighbours and community’. It also warned if the behaviour continued it may put the tenancy at risk.
These were not 14-day notices or notices issued under section 55A RTA antisocial behaviour provisions.
After viewing the videos Ms Cawdron questioned if the people at unit 2 were just dropping things off and not parking. The sheer number of incidents and videos of others being prevents from using the driveway leads me to disagree with this assertion. The tenants evidence established that this is a continuous issue.
My concern is that the tenants fulfilled their obligation to inform the landlord but during this period of a year, and 38 emails, only two warnings were issued by the landlord and the behaviour of the unit 2 occupants has not changed.
The tenants meanwhile a. Had to take time off work due to concern for their property. A letter from an employer was provided in support of this. b. Do not feel safe, and are very concerned for the safety of relatives and grandchildren who come to visit c. Are very concerned about drug use and unpredictable behaviours d. Are worn out from trying and getting no response from their landlord
The landlord initially stated that they believed they had taken all reasonable steps to address the issues raised by the tenants, but when presented with the tenant’s evidence agreed that the tenant was being harassed by the tenants in unit 2 and that stronger action should have been taken.
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986 states that a tenant shall not. cause or permit any interference with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of any of the landlord’s other tenants in the use of the premises occupied by those other tenants, or with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of any other person residing in the neighbourhood. See section 40 RTA
I find that the tenants in unit 2 are in breach of this provision of the RTA.
A landlord has responsibilities when their tenants are in breach, and this includes that they must 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. See section 45(1)(e) RTA.
The tenant sought exemplary damages from the landlord for this breach. Exemplary damages are awarded when a party commits an unlawful act as defined by the RTA. A breach of section 45(1) (e) is not held to be an unlawful act. Compensation
The tenant sought compensation for stress and exhaustion. Compensation can be awarded to remedy an actual loss suffered by a party for example not getting what they contracted for under their tenancy agreement quiet enjoyment of the premises.
This issue was considered in a previous tenancy decision application NZTT 4821977 23 March 2024 where the circumstances of the tenancy were similar. In that application the tenant was also harassed by other tenants who had the same landlord, enduring disruptive behaviour, drug use, death threats, car tyres slashed and witnessing a serious assault. The adjudicator referenced the District Court decision in Maria Cavanagh v Kainga Ora [2022] NZDC 7003 where over a 10-month period the tenant was disturbed by domestic violence and the other tenants were eventually moved. The District Court ordered $1000.00 by way of compensation to the tenant.
In application NZTT 4821977 the adjudicator found the effect on the tenants were much more significand because the tenant was the subject of the abuse and became fearful of leaving their house. An award $3000.00 in compensation was made.
When I consider this claim in comparison, the tenant has endured a long period of harassment without the landlord taking reasonable steps to ensure the behaviour of their other tenants did not impact on the applicants. The tenants were the direct subject of one threat and fear for their safety. It is difficult to determine a fair and reasonable level of compensation but using the Tenancy Tribunal decision NZTT 4821977 where the facts were slightly more extreme and Cavanagh as a guide, I find that an award of $2500.00 is appropriate.
As part of their application the tenant sought immediate termination of the tenancy in unit 2. The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to make this order. An application for termination must first come from the landlords.
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee and name, and details suppression is granted as requested.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5341875 — net $2,528.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Compensation	$2,500.00	Compensation
Net award	$2,528.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$2,528.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.
Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities must pay [The tenant/s] $2,528.00 immediately.

Reasons

Both tenants attended the hearing. Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities
The tenants seek compensation and exemplary damages for permitting interference with their reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy in the use of the premises, and for not taking 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.
The tenants live in unit 1 in a block of four units, who all share a driveway and have allocated parking and exclusive use areas in front of their garages. Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities is the landlord of the tenant applicants and the tenants in unit 2.
The tenants stated that they have ongoing and escalating issues with the occupants and tenants of unit 2 including, a) blocking the shared driveway, b) parking in their parking space, c) ongoing antisocial behaviour, d) domestic violence, e) drug use and f) threats to property.
In support of this the tenants provided to the Tribunal a) A timeline of 38 attempts to communicate with the landlord about these issues, from 22 January 2025 to 10 February 2026, being the day before the hearing b) Recordings from security cameras that had been supplied to the landlord of parking incidents, violence, probable drug use and threats.
A least 7 videos were shown at the hearing detailing parking by unit 2 tenants in the common driveway. Some showed repairmen being unable to access the back units and one where the tenant could not drive out to work.
Other videos showed domestic abuse between unit 2 occupants and visitors and probable drug use.
One video recorded a threat from a visitor to unit 2 to the applicants that they would “smash their camera”.
The tenants said that their peace and security were being breached and they were being harassed by the occupants and visitors of unit 2.
The tenants said that they are worn out and feel that no one is listening to them when they have reached out for help and that is why they came to the Tribunal.
The landlord acknowledged that the tenant had sent communications including multiple emails to them but that they weren’t saved into the central repository in the system. Some of the emails were responded to but because they had not all been saved into the central repository Ms Thompson-wise was only aware of all the correspondence on the day of the hearing and said that this was a downfall on her part.
The landlord issued 2 breach notices to the tenants in unit 2, on 26 May 2025 and 14 August 2025 warning them that they had breached their responsibilities under section 40(2)(c) and to ’be aware of the impact that the behaviour has on your neighbours and community’. It also warned if the behaviour continued it may put the tenancy at risk.
These were not 14-day notices or notices issued under section 55A RTA antisocial behaviour provisions.
After viewing the videos Ms Cawdron questioned if the people at unit 2 were just dropping things off and not parking. The sheer number of incidents and videos of others being prevents from using the driveway leads me to disagree with this assertion. The tenants evidence established that this is a continuous issue.
My concern is that the tenants fulfilled their obligation to inform the landlord but during this period of a year, and 38 emails, only two warnings were issued by the landlord and the behaviour of the unit 2 occupants has not changed.
The tenants meanwhile a. Had to take time off work due to concern for their property. A letter from an employer was provided in support of this. b. Do not feel safe, and are very concerned for the safety of relatives and grandchildren who come to visit c. Are very concerned about drug use and unpredictable behaviours d. Are worn out from trying and getting no response from their landlord
The landlord initially stated that they believed they had taken all reasonable steps to address the issues raised by the tenants, but when presented with the tenant’s evidence agreed that the tenant was being harassed by the tenants in unit 2 and that stronger action should have been taken.
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986 states that a tenant shall not. cause or permit any interference with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of any of the landlord’s other tenants in the use of the premises occupied by those other tenants, or with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of any other person residing in the neighbourhood. See section 40 RTA
I find that the tenants in unit 2 are in breach of this provision of the RTA.
A landlord has responsibilities when their tenants are in breach, and this includes that they must 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. See section 45(1)(e) RTA.
The tenant sought exemplary damages from the landlord for this breach. Exemplary damages are awarded when a party commits an unlawful act as defined by the RTA. A breach of section 45(1) (e) is not held to be an unlawful act. Compensation
The tenant sought compensation for stress and exhaustion. Compensation can be awarded to remedy an actual loss suffered by a party for example not getting what they contracted for under their tenancy agreement quiet enjoyment of the premises.
This issue was considered in a previous tenancy decision application NZTT 4821977 23 March 2024 where the circumstances of the tenancy were similar. In that application the tenant was also harassed by other tenants who had the same landlord, enduring disruptive behaviour, drug use, death threats, car tyres slashed and witnessing a serious assault. The adjudicator referenced the District Court decision in Maria Cavanagh v Kainga Ora [2022] NZDC 7003 where over a 10-month period the tenant was disturbed by domestic violence and the other tenants were eventually moved. The District Court ordered $1000.00 by way of compensation to the tenant.
In application NZTT 4821977 the adjudicator found the effect on the tenants were much more significand because the tenant was the subject of the abuse and became fearful of leaving their house. An award $3000.00 in compensation was made.
When I consider this claim in comparison, the tenant has endured a long period of harassment without the landlord taking reasonable steps to ensure the behaviour of their other tenants did not impact on the applicants. The tenants were the direct subject of one threat and fear for their safety. It is difficult to determine a fair and reasonable level of compensation but using the Tenancy Tribunal decision NZTT 4821977 where the facts were slightly more extreme and Cavanagh as a guide, I find that an award of $2500.00 is appropriate.
As part of their application the tenant sought immediate termination of the tenancy in unit 2. The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to make this order. An application for termination must first come from the landlords.
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee and name, and details suppression is granted as requested.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5341875 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5341875 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions