What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5425869?

The tribunal order states: The tenant Brian George Rikirangi must grant access to the landlord Kainga

How much money was awarded in case 5425869?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5425869?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5425869?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13251078-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5425869?

The tribunal order states: The tenant Brian George Rikirangi must grant access to the landlord Kainga

How much money was awarded in case 5425869?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5425869?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5425869?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13251078-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 2, 121 Muller Road, Blenheim, Blenheim 7201 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5425869 — 14-day notice

Order

The tenant Brian George Rikirangi must grant access to the landlord Kainga Ora–Homes and Communities and allow the landlord to inspect the premises at Unit/Flat 2, 121 Muller Road, Blenheim 7201 between 10am and 12pm on Thursday 19 March 2026.
If the tenant fails to allow the landlord access on the date and time ordered then: a. The tenancy at Unit/Flat 2, 121 Muller Road, Blenheim, Blenheim 7201 will terminate and the landlord will have possession of the premises at 11:59pm Monday 23 March 2026.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing via remote video conference. The tenant did not join the hearing via the video or telephone link as instructed in the notice of hearing.
The landlord claims that the tenant has refused to allow the landlord to inspect the premises on several occasions. The most recent inspection was on 7 November 2024. The landlord served a 14-day notice to remedy on the tenant dated 14 January 2026 and 22 January 2026. The tenant has failed to remedy the breach.
The landlord wants to inspect the premises to ascertain if there are any maintenance issues requiring attention and to view the state and condition of the premises.
Section 48(4)(b) RTA provides that failure by the tenant, without reasonable excuse, to allow the landlord to enter upon the premises in any circumstances in which the landlord is entitled to enter under subsection (2) is an unlawful act.
Given the landlord’s previous notices of inspection being refused, the landlord now seeks a conditional termination order in the event the tenant does not allow access.
Where the Tribunal finds the tenant has failed to comply with their obligations, including to allow the landlord access to the premises for the purposes of conducting property inspections, the Tribunal may order the tenant to do anything necessary to remedy the breach by that party of any express or implied provision of the tenancy agreement or any provision of the RTA, or to do anything that that party is required to do by any such provision. See section 77(2)(l) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
I therefore order the tenant to comply with section 48(2)(b) RTA and direct the tenant to give access to the landlord accordingly.

Should a conditional termination order be made?

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. 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. See section 56(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The tenant breached their obligations by failing to allow the landlord access for the purpose of routine inspections on several occasions.
On 14 January 2026 and 22 January 2026, the landlord served a 14-day notice on the tenant but the breach was not remedied within the required period. It would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy.
Despite my finding that it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy I have granted a conditional termination as sought by the landlord. See section 78(3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The conditional termination order will lapse if it is fully complied with.
For the avoidance of doubt, this order constitutes the required notice by the landlord under section 48(2)(b) RTA for the inspection to take place at that date and time.
The landlord does not seek reimbursement of the filing fee.

Order

The tenant Brian George Rikirangi must grant access to the landlord Kainga Ora–Homes and Communities and allow the landlord to inspect the premises at Unit/Flat 2, 121 Muller Road, Blenheim 7201 between 10am and 12pm on Thursday 19 March 2026.
If the tenant fails to allow the landlord access on the date and time ordered then: a. The tenancy at Unit/Flat 2, 121 Muller Road, Blenheim, Blenheim 7201 will terminate and the landlord will have possession of the premises at 11:59pm Monday 23 March 2026.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing via remote video conference. The tenant did not join the hearing via the video or telephone link as instructed in the notice of hearing.
The landlord claims that the tenant has refused to allow the landlord to inspect the premises on several occasions. The most recent inspection was on 7 November 2024. The landlord served a 14-day notice to remedy on the tenant dated 14 January 2026 and 22 January 2026. The tenant has failed to remedy the breach.
The landlord wants to inspect the premises to ascertain if there are any maintenance issues requiring attention and to view the state and condition of the premises.
Section 48(4)(b) RTA provides that failure by the tenant, without reasonable excuse, to allow the landlord to enter upon the premises in any circumstances in which the landlord is entitled to enter under subsection (2) is an unlawful act.
Given the landlord’s previous notices of inspection being refused, the landlord now seeks a conditional termination order in the event the tenant does not allow access.
Where the Tribunal finds the tenant has failed to comply with their obligations, including to allow the landlord access to the premises for the purposes of conducting property inspections, the Tribunal may order the tenant to do anything necessary to remedy the breach by that party of any express or implied provision of the tenancy agreement or any provision of the RTA, or to do anything that that party is required to do by any such provision. See section 77(2)(l) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
I therefore order the tenant to comply with section 48(2)(b) RTA and direct the tenant to give access to the landlord accordingly.

Should a conditional termination order be made?

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. 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. See section 56(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The tenant breached their obligations by failing to allow the landlord access for the purpose of routine inspections on several occasions.
On 14 January 2026 and 22 January 2026, the landlord served a 14-day notice on the tenant but the breach was not remedied within the required period. It would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy.
Despite my finding that it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy I have granted a conditional termination as sought by the landlord. See section 78(3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The conditional termination order will lapse if it is fully complied with.
For the avoidance of doubt, this order constitutes the required notice by the landlord under section 48(2)(b) RTA for the inspection to take place at that date and time.
The landlord does not seek reimbursement of the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5425869 — 14-day notice at Unit/Flat 2, 121 Muller Road, Blenheim, Blenheim 7201

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5425869 — 14-day notice at Unit/Flat 2, 121 Muller Road, Blenheim, Blenheim 7201

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should a conditional termination order be made?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should a conditional termination order be made?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions