How much money was awarded in case 5467649?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5467649?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5467649?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13360636-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5467649?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5467649?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5467649?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13360636-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit/Flat 705B, 20 Park Avenue, Auckland 1051, The Tenancy Tribunal Case 5467649 — 14-day notice

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5467649 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.

Tenantcheck Insights

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5467649. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
at 12 noon today, Friday 27 March 2026. 3. The tenant is to reimburse the landlord the filing fee on the application of	$28.00		at 12 noon today, Friday 27 March 2026. 3. The tenant is to reimburse the landlord the filing fee on the application of

The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.

The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at Unit/Flat 705B, 20 Park Avenue, Auckland 1051, The Residences, is terminated, and possession is granted to Staircase Property Management Limited As Agent For P4jm Ellerslie Ltd, at 12 noon today, Friday 27 March 2026.

The tenant is to reimburse the landlord the filing fee on the application of $28.00.

Reasons

The landlord attended the video hearing.

I am satisfied that a notice of hearing was served on the tenant with instructions for joining the hearing by video or telephone. The tenant did not join the hearing and it proceeded in his absence.

The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the tenant’s obligations under section 40(2)(c) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) which provides that a tenant must 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.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

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. See section 56(1) RTA.

Where the breach is not capable of remedy, the landlord is not expressly required to serve a 14-day breach notice on the tenant. A breach is not capable to remedy where the thing done, or its effect, cannot be undone.

However, unless the breach is serious, the Tribunal usually requires the landlord to have warned the tenant about the likely consequences of continued breach before it will exercise its discretion to terminate.

The tenancy is for a fixed term which commenced on 21 January 2026 and is to end on 20 January 2027. The premises are an apartment in a 12—storey building consisting of hotel guests and residential tenants.

The tenant has breached their obligations by doing the following: a. Knocking on the doors of other tenants late at night/ in the early morning hours. The first incident occurred at 2am on 1 March 2026 and was reported by the affected tenant on 2 March 2026; b. Multiple complaints continued from neighbouring tenants that the tenant was harassing them and disturbing their privacy and peace by knocking on their doors at all hours; demanding they provide identification; accusing people of stealing his money and hacking his accounts; telling them he would have them evicted; making his accusations in a very loud voice which other tenants/residents found intimidating and frightening; c. A neighbour sharing dual fire door access with the tenant to an enclosed hall space outside their respective apartment doors reported an incident on 9 March 2026 when this tenant knocked on their door several times requesting that the fire door be locked. The tenant could then be heard repeatedly leaving and returning to the hallway outside the complainant’s apartment door. He later knocked on the complainant’s door several times saying he was the building owner and to ‘please open up’. He also said if the door was not opened he would call Police; The complainant felt very unsafe, particularly as the shared fire door if locked would potentially confine both apartment users in the same enclosed hallway space. The complainant moved out and was relocated elsewhere. d. The tenant on several occasions verbally abused staff in the hotel lobby in the building and they feared for their safety; e. The tenant began sending emails to hotel staff that he would be conducting a fire drill and tenants would have to provide identification before they could re-enter the building; f. On Sunday 22 March, the tenant sat in a chair outside his apartment and was abusing other occupants on the floor and trying to prevent them from access to the floor. He then entered the hotel lobby and began abusing staff. Police were called and he was arrested and removed for his behaviour towards Police.

The landlord provided statements from 5 tenants affected by the tenant’s behaviour. The landlord has been advised that the tenant may now be receiving mental health assistance and will not likely return to the building.

The breach is not capable of remedy because there have been multiple incidents of verbal abuse, anti-social behaviour and harassment of neighbouring tenants causing them to feel unsafe and frightened, the effect of which cannot be undone. There is also a valid concern that the tenant is suffering from a mental health illness that currently prevents him from modifying his behaviour. In any event, the landlord did send various warning notices to the tenant and 14 day notices on 4 March and 13 March 2026 asking that the tenant stop the behaviour but it did not stop.

I am satisfied on the evidence provided that the tenant has breached his obligation under s40(2)(c) RTA on multiple occasions causing others in the building to feel unsafe and frightened and it has seriously impeded their peace, comfort, and privacy. For this reason, It would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy.

I am ordering suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details as there is strong evidence that he is suffering from a mental health illness and publication of his details may be detrimental to his health. I consider that the tenant’s health must outweigh any Public interest factor.

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5467649. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
at 12 noon today, Friday 27 March 2026. 3. The tenant is to reimburse the landlord the filing fee on the application of	$28.00		at 12 noon today, Friday 27 March 2026. 3. The tenant is to reimburse the landlord the filing fee on the application of

The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.

The tenant is to reimburse the landlord the filing fee on the application of $28.00.

Reasons

The landlord attended the video hearing.

I am satisfied that a notice of hearing was served on the tenant with instructions for joining the hearing by video or telephone. The tenant did not join the hearing and it proceeded in his absence.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

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. See section 56(1) RTA.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5467649 — 14-day notice at Unit/Flat 705B, 20 Park Avenue, Auckland 1051, The

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5467649 — 14-day notice at Unit/Flat 705B, 20 Park Avenue, Auckland 1051, The

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions