Tenantcheck Insights · Case study
Tenancy Tribunal case 5459231 — Harassment
Decided 23 Mar 2026 · Published 23 Mar 2026 · Application 5459231
- Harassment
Party names are redacted in the official published order. This page summarises the dispute only — not individual identities.
At a glance
Key facts from the published tribunal order.
Adjudicator
R Armstrong
Claims & awards
What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.
No individual claim amounts were reconciled for this order. View the official Ministry of Justice PDF for full detail.
Order
- The Tribunal orders suppression of the tenancy address.
- The tenancy of Tiana Watson-Walker at [Tenancy address suppressed] is terminated, and possession is granted to Otautahi Community Housing Trust, at
- 59pm on Monday 27 April 2026.
- Tiana Watson-Walker must pay Otautahi Community Housing Trust $28 filing fee immediately.
Reasons
- Only the landlord attended the hearing.
- The landlord has applied for an order terminating this periodic tenancy on the grounds of anti-social behaviour by the tenant or someone on the premises with the tenant’s permission.
- The landlord states that the anti-social behaviour involves a dog that has been on the premises for the past year or so. It has repeatedly jumped over the fence at the rear of the premises and into a neighbour’s garden causing the neighbour alarm and distress and creating a nuisance.
- Subject to certain considerations, the Tribunal must make an order terminating the tenancy if it is satisfied: a. on 3 separate occasions within a 90-day period the tenant, or a person in the premises with the tenant’s permission, engaged in anti-social behaviour in connection with the tenancy; and b. on each occasion the landlord gave the tenant written notice— i. describing clearly which specific behaviour was considered to be anti-social and (if known to the landlord) who engaged in it; and ii. advising the tenant of the date, approximate time, and location of the behaviour; and iii. stating how many other notices (if any) the landlord has given the tenant under this paragraph in connection with the same tenancy and the same 90-day period; and iv. advising the tenant of the tenant’s right to make an application to the Tribunal challenging the notice and; c. the landlord’s application to the Tribunal was made within 28 days after the landlord gave the third notice.
- The Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act) confirms that antisocial behaviour includes harassment or any act or omission (whether intentional or not) that reasonably causes alarm, distress or nuisance that is more than minor.
- The premises is one of many dwellings in a social housing development operated by the landlord. There is a garden area at the rear of the premises surrounded by a six-foot-high close boarded fence.
- On the other side of the fence at the rear is the neighbour’s garden. She has lived there for 23 years and for most of that time there were no buildings at the back of her garden.
- Over the past year a dog from the premises has repeatedly jumped over the fence into the neighbour’s garden. There it has chased the neighbour’s cats, and it has snarled and growled at the neighbour with its hackles up. The neighbour has felt menaced by the dog to the extent that she is hesitant to use her garden. She is not in good health and if the dog went for her, she does not think that she could get inside her house to safety before the dog attacked her.
- The dog is large and muscular. From the neighbour’s garden it has jumped back over the fence into the garden of the premises or over the fence into one of the neighbouring gardens. Sometimes it has gone through the neighbour’s property onto the street where the tenant picks it up.
- The neighbour has spoken to the tenant about the situation, but nothing has changed. The neighbour says that there have been at least 30 occasions in the past year, that she is aware of, that the dog has jumped the fence into her garden
- I find that the landlord has established that the tenant has engaged in anti-social behaviour at least three times in connection with the tenancy by failing to secure the dog inside the premises and prevent it from entering the neighbour’s garden.
- The landlord has served three notices on the tenant as required by the Act, and the application to the Tribunal was made within 28 days of the date of the third notice.
- I consider it would not be unfair to terminate the tenancy considering the circumstances in which the behaviour arose, and the notices were given. I cannot see that the landlord has acted in any retaliatory way in bringing this application.
- I cannot consider the impact on the tenant, in making an order for termination of the tenancy.
- The landlord proposed allowing the tenant 28 days to vacate the premises and so that is what I have allowed.
- The landlord has succeeded and so I have awarded the filing fee.
- I have suppressed the address of the premises to protect the privacy of the neighbour.