What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5405888 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at 41 Concord Place, Burwood,

How much money was awarded in case 5405888?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5405888?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5405888?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12922231-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5405888 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at 41 Concord Place, Burwood,

How much money was awarded in case 5405888?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5405888?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5405888?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12922231-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

41 Concord Place, Burwood, Christchurch 8083 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5405888 — 14-day notice

Order

The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at 41 Concord Place, Burwood, Christchurch 8083 is terminated, and possession is granted to Otautahi Community Housing Trust, at 11:59pm on Sunday 4 January 2026.

[The tenant/s] must pay Otautahi Community Housing Trust $28.00 being the filing fee on this application.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

The landlord applied for termination of the tenancy on the ground that the tenant had threatened to assault another tenant in the complex. The landlord also says that the tenancy should be ended because the tenant has engaged in anti- social behaviour 1 .

If a threat of assault is proved, the Tribunal must terminate the tenancy 2 .

At the hearing I heard evidence from Mr Mr W and Mr M. They both live in units in the complex not far from Mr Cane’s unit. Mr M has since moved to a unit 1 See s.55A RTA 2 S.55(1)(c) RTA further away within the complex. Both provided written statements before the hearing.

Mr W gave evidence of having heard Mr Cane and a person who was visiting Mr Cane for a Halloween party, directing abuse at Mr W. He described the visitor, who was holding a machete wave it towards Mr W’s Unit saying, “....we are going to kill the c....”. Mr W immediately called the police.

Mr M’s evidence corroborated Mr W’s evidence about that incident. He also described another occasion when Mr Cane was cycling around the complex drunk and yelling abuse at Mr W, saying he was going to kill him, before damaging Mr W’s BBQ and outdoor pots.

Another witness who gave evidence at the hearing, who is a long term resident of the complex who knows Mr Cane well, confirmed also hearing those threats.

At the hearing, Mr Cane called evidence from the person who Mr W and Mr described as the visitor with the machete who had been waving it towards Mr W and threatening to chop him with it. He denied those allegations.

There are other witness Mr Cane wanted the Tribunal to hear from and requested an adjournment. Mr Cane was given until 28 December to provide statements from those intended witnesses so the Tribunal could assess whether an adjournment would be appropriate.

No such statements have been filed.

Is the claim proved?

As applicant, the landlord must provide evidence that proves its claim on the balance of probabilities (more likely than not). These are serious allegations so a solid evidential foundation is required.

The allegation of threated assaults on Mr W, are corroborated by two independent witnesses. Both were very clear that their evidence was not in any way induced or influenced by Mr W.

There is evidence of a pattern of behaviour involving Mr Cane becoming intoxicated and behaving in in antisocial ways, including abuse of and threats toward Mr W.

Mr Cane clearly feels that he has been the victim of a campaign of unreasonable complaints and harassment from Mr W. Even if there was truth to that, it would not justify the intimidation and threats the witnesses have confirmed.

I find it proved more likely than not the Mr Cane did threaten to assault Mr W.

The tenancy must be terminated.

Because Otautahi Community Housing Trust has succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Order

The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at 41 Concord Place, Burwood, Christchurch 8083 is terminated, and possession is granted to Otautahi Community Housing Trust, at 11:59pm on Sunday 4 January 2026.
[The tenant/s] must pay Otautahi Community Housing Trust $28.00 being the filing fee on this application.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The landlord applied for termination of the tenancy on the ground that the tenant had threatened to assault another tenant in the complex. The landlord also says that the tenancy should be ended because the tenant has engaged in anti- social behaviour 1 .
If a threat of assault is proved, the Tribunal must terminate the tenancy 2 .
At the hearing I heard evidence from Mr Mr W and Mr M. They both live in units in the complex not far from Mr Cane’s unit. Mr M has since moved to a unit 1 See s.55A RTA 2 S.55(1)(c) RTA further away within the complex. Both provided written statements before the hearing.
Mr W gave evidence of having heard Mr Cane and a person who was visiting Mr Cane for a Halloween party, directing abuse at Mr W. He described the visitor, who was holding a machete wave it towards Mr W’s Unit saying, “....we are going to kill the c....”. Mr W immediately called the police.
Mr M’s evidence corroborated Mr W’s evidence about that incident. He also described another occasion when Mr Cane was cycling around the complex drunk and yelling abuse at Mr W, saying he was going to kill him, before damaging Mr W’s BBQ and outdoor pots.
Another witness who gave evidence at the hearing, who is a long term resident of the complex who knows Mr Cane well, confirmed also hearing those threats.
At the hearing, Mr Cane called evidence from the person who Mr W and Mr described as the visitor with the machete who had been waving it towards Mr W and threatening to chop him with it. He denied those allegations.
There are other witness Mr Cane wanted the Tribunal to hear from and requested an adjournment. Mr Cane was given until 28 December to provide statements from those intended witnesses so the Tribunal could assess whether an adjournment would be appropriate.
No such statements have been filed.

Is the claim proved?

As applicant, the landlord must provide evidence that proves its claim on the balance of probabilities (more likely than not). These are serious allegations so a solid evidential foundation is required.
The allegation of threated assaults on Mr W, are corroborated by two independent witnesses. Both were very clear that their evidence was not in any way induced or influenced by Mr W.
There is evidence of a pattern of behaviour involving Mr Cane becoming intoxicated and behaving in in antisocial ways, including abuse of and threats toward Mr W.
Mr Cane clearly feels that he has been the victim of a campaign of unreasonable complaints and harassment from Mr W. Even if there was truth to that, it would not justify the intimidation and threats the witnesses have confirmed.
I find it proved more likely than not the Mr Cane did threaten to assault Mr W.
The tenancy must be terminated.
Because Otautahi Community Housing Trust has succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5405888 — 14-day notice at 41 Concord Place, Burwood, Christchurch 8083

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5405888 — 14-day notice at 41 Concord Place, Burwood, Christchurch 8083

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Is the claim proved?

Topics & place

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Is the claim proved?

Topics & place

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions