What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5448509 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] must either:

How much money was awarded in case 5448509?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5448509?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5448509?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13904459-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5448509 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] must either:

How much money was awarded in case 5448509?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5448509?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5448509?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13904459-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

27 Collins Crescent, Feilding, Feilding 4702 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5448509 — 14-day notice

Order

[The tenant/s] must either: (a) Remove all unregistered and/or unwarranted vehicles from the tenanted premises by 4pm on Saturday 15 August 2026; or (b) Allow Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities to remove all unregistered and/or unwarranted vehicles from the tenanted premises by 4pm on Saturday 15 August 2026.
If neither 1(a)or 1(b) occurs within 5 working days of Saturday 15 August 2026, then [The tenant/s]’s tenancy terminates immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing - the landlord by video conference and the tenant by telephone.
The background to this claim is that Mr Hati has rented the premises since 11 February 2011. On 25 September 2025 the landlord advised him that he was in breach of his obligation to keep the premises reasonably clean and tidy and he was requested to remove a car wreck and “old metal recycling” by 15 October 2025.
Mr Hati did not comply with this request and on 9 December 2025, a further breach notice was sent to Mr Hati requiring him to remove all unregistered and unwarranted vehicles, old bikes, old whiteware and scrap metal from the property by 21 January 2026.
Again Mr Hati did not comply with this request.
Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities then made an application to the Tribunal seeking a consequential termination order. In other words Mr Hati was to comply with his obligation to keep the premises reasonably clean and tidy or his tenancy would be terminated.
On 7 May 2026 the Tenancy Tribunal ordered Mr Hati to: (a) clear all unwarranted and unregistered vehicles from outside the property; and (b) clear all bikes from outside the property; and (c) clear all car parts from the outside of the property; and (d) clear all whiteware from outside the property; and (e) clear all scrap ketal from outside of the property.
The Tribunal gave Mr Hati until 15 June 2026 to complete this work and adjourned the hearing so that final orders could be made depending on whether Mr Hati had complied with that order.
At today’s hearing I heard that Mr Hati had made a lot of progress but that there were outstanding issues. The landlord advised that they were now offering Mr Hati a way through the issues with the vehicles by offering that he allow them to remove them.
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.
Mr Hati says that he should not have to remove the vehicles or have his tenancy terminated for reasons that include: (a) He removed the vehicles from Kimbolton because they were not safe there; and; (b) He is a mechanic by trade and that the landlord was aware of this when offering him the tenancy. Unregistered and unwarranted vehicles are therefore to be expected; and (c) He has been asking for help for other things since 2010 and has received no help; and (d) He has the opportunity to get someone to advocate for him; and (e) Social Welfare could help him buy his own house but has not done so.
Having heard at length from Mr Hati I have made a conditional termination order as reflected above.
I do so because I accept that Mr Hati is in breach of his obligation to keep the premises reasonably clean and tidy.
It would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy because this has been a longstanding issue with Mr Hati. While I accept that the vehicles may not be safe at Kimbolton, and that he has asked for help, unrelated to this tenancy, which has not been forthcoming, and that he has not had the opportunity to purchase his own home, these issues are irrelevant to his obligation to keep the premises reasonably clean and tidy.
Further, being a mechanic by trade does not absolve him of his obligations to keep the premises reasonably clean and tidy in accordance with the provisions of s40(1)(c) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
With regard to the possibility of his obtaining an advocate, I reminded Mr Hati that this issue has been going on since September 2025 and I would not be allowing any further adjournments so that he could get advocacy help.
Despite my finding that it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy, having heard the evidence today I am satisfied that it would be reasonable to allow Mr Hati one last chance to have the unregistered and unwarranted cars removed, as per Order 1(a) or 1(b) above.
The conditional termination order will lapse if it is fully complied with. If the tenant breaches the order, the possession order is enforceable for 90 days from the first breach. See section 64(4)(b) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. C ter Haar 16 July 2026

Order

[The tenant/s] must either: (a) Remove all unregistered and/or unwarranted vehicles from the tenanted premises by 4pm on Saturday 15 August 2026; or (b) Allow Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities to remove all unregistered and/or unwarranted vehicles from the tenanted premises by 4pm on Saturday 15 August 2026.

If neither 1(a)or 1(b) occurs within 5 working days of Saturday 15 August 2026, then [The tenant/s]’s tenancy terminates immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing - the landlord by video conference and the tenant by telephone.

The background to this claim is that Mr Hati has rented the premises since 11 February 2011. On 25 September 2025 the landlord advised him that he was in breach of his obligation to keep the premises reasonably clean and tidy and he was requested to remove a car wreck and “old metal recycling” by 15 October 2025.

Mr Hati did not comply with this request and on 9 December 2025, a further breach notice was sent to Mr Hati requiring him to remove all unregistered and unwarranted vehicles, old bikes, old whiteware and scrap metal from the property by 21 January 2026.

Again Mr Hati did not comply with this request.

Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities then made an application to the Tribunal seeking a consequential termination order. In other words Mr Hati was to comply with his obligation to keep the premises reasonably clean and tidy or his tenancy would be terminated.

On 7 May 2026 the Tenancy Tribunal ordered Mr Hati to: (a) clear all unwarranted and unregistered vehicles from outside the property; and (b) clear all bikes from outside the property; and (c) clear all car parts from the outside of the property; and (d) clear all whiteware from outside the property; and (e) clear all scrap ketal from outside of the property.

The Tribunal gave Mr Hati until 15 June 2026 to complete this work and adjourned the hearing so that final orders could be made depending on whether Mr Hati had complied with that order.

At today’s hearing I heard that Mr Hati had made a lot of progress but that there were outstanding issues. The landlord advised that they were now offering Mr Hati a way through the issues with the vehicles by offering that he allow them to remove them.

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.

Mr Hati says that he should not have to remove the vehicles or have his tenancy terminated for reasons that include: (a) He removed the vehicles from Kimbolton because they were not safe there; and; (b) He is a mechanic by trade and that the landlord was aware of this when offering him the tenancy. Unregistered and unwarranted vehicles are therefore to be expected; and (c) He has been asking for help for other things since 2010 and has received no help; and (d) He has the opportunity to get someone to advocate for him; and (e) Social Welfare could help him buy his own house but has not done so.

Having heard at length from Mr Hati I have made a conditional termination order as reflected above.

I do so because I accept that Mr Hati is in breach of his obligation to keep the premises reasonably clean and tidy.

It would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy because this has been a longstanding issue with Mr Hati. While I accept that the vehicles may not be safe at Kimbolton, and that he has asked for help, unrelated to this tenancy, which has not been forthcoming, and that he has not had the opportunity to purchase his own home, these issues are irrelevant to his obligation to keep the premises reasonably clean and tidy.

Further, being a mechanic by trade does not absolve him of his obligations to keep the premises reasonably clean and tidy in accordance with the provisions of s40(1)(c) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

With regard to the possibility of his obtaining an advocate, I reminded Mr Hati that this issue has been going on since September 2025 and I would not be allowing any further adjournments so that he could get advocacy help.

Despite my finding that it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy, having heard the evidence today I am satisfied that it would be reasonable to allow Mr Hati one last chance to have the unregistered and unwarranted cars removed, as per Order 1(a) or 1(b) above.

The conditional termination order will lapse if it is fully complied with. If the tenant breaches the order, the possession order is enforceable for 90 days from the first breach. See section 64(4)(b) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. C ter Haar 16 July 2026

Tenancy Tribunal case 5448509 — 14-day notice at 27 Collins Crescent, Feilding, Feilding 4702

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5448509 — 14-day notice at 27 Collins Crescent, Feilding, Feilding 4702

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions