What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5517129 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at Unit/Flat Flat 2, 20 Berwyn Avenue,

How much money was awarded in case 5517129?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5517129?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5517129?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13770860-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5517129 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at Unit/Flat Flat 2, 20 Berwyn Avenue,

How much money was awarded in case 5517129?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5517129?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5517129?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13770860-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat Flat 2, 20 Berwyn Avenue, Takanini, Takanini 2112 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5517129 — Harassment

Order

The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at Unit/Flat Flat 2, 20 Berwyn Avenue, Takanini, Takanini 2112 is terminated, and possession is granted to Kāinga Ora– Homes And Communities immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the remote hearing.
The tenant did not attend the hearing by Teams video link or by telephone. The Tribunal may hear matters in the absence of a party where satisfied that notice of the hearing has been given. I am satisfied that notice of the hearing has been given.
This is a periodic tenancy which commenced on 19 November 2025.
The landlord has applied to the Tribunal for an order terminating the periodic tenancy on the grounds of anti-social behaviour from the tenant or someone on the premises with the tenant’s permission.
The landlord states that the anti-social behaviour is;
On 19 March 2026, the landlord served an anti-social behaviour notice on the tenant. The first notice relates to an incident that occurred on 13 March 2026. Neighbours complained that the music was playing consistently between 1pm to 11pm. Kāinga Ora received complaints from private owners that the tenant was playing music so loud that the neighbouring house would shake. In addition, Ms Matthews would constantly argue and swear at people at the property. It was clearly audible beyond the boundary of the property.
On 2 April 2026, the landlord served a second anti-social behaviour notice on the tenant. This second notice relates to an incident that occurred on 27 March 2026 at approximately 2.15 pm. The landlord says that the tenant was involved in an altercation with her son. During the argument, the tenant’s son damaged furniture and the lounge door inside the property. There was excessive yelling and swearing that frightened the neighbours. As a result, the police were called. By the time the police attended, the tenant’s son was removed from the property by a neighbour who took him to another address. Photos or the damage and a police report were provided in evidence.
The third anti-social behaviour notice is dated 8 May 2026. The notice relates to incidents that occurred on 10 April 2026 and 13 April 2026. On Friday 10 April 2026 at 7pm the tenant was involved in an altercation with her son. They were seen and heard shouting and screaming. As her son left the premises he was seen to damage the neighbour’s letterbox.
Another incident occurred on Monday 13 April 2026 at 1.10pm, where the tenant was again yelling and screaming loudly from inside her home. There was also audible banging, smashing noises, and her son eventually left the property. On both occasions, the police were called and attended the property to speak with the tenant.
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 Act confirms that antisocial behaviour includes harassment or any act (whether intentional or not) that reasonably causes alarm, distress or nuisance that is more than minor.
I have taken into account the evidence presented by the parties as set out above.
I have determined that the landlord has established that anti-social behaviour has occurred on the premises by the tenant or a person on the tenancy with the tenant’s permission. The landlord has served notices on the tenant as required in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, 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 taking into account 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 tenancy is terminated immediately.
The landlord has also made an application for termination of the tenancy under s.56 RTA for a breach by the tenant of s.40(2)(c) RTA. As I have already terminated the tenancy under s.55A RTA, I am not required to consider the alternative application.

Order

The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at Unit/Flat Flat 2, 20 Berwyn Avenue, Takanini, Takanini 2112 is terminated, and possession is granted to Kāinga Ora– Homes And Communities immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the remote hearing.
The tenant did not attend the hearing by Teams video link or by telephone. The Tribunal may hear matters in the absence of a party where satisfied that notice of the hearing has been given. I am satisfied that notice of the hearing has been given.
This is a periodic tenancy which commenced on 19 November 2025.
The landlord has applied to the Tribunal for an order terminating the periodic tenancy on the grounds of anti-social behaviour from the tenant or someone on the premises with the tenant’s permission.
The landlord states that the anti-social behaviour is;
On 19 March 2026, the landlord served an anti-social behaviour notice on the tenant. The first notice relates to an incident that occurred on 13 March 2026. Neighbours complained that the music was playing consistently between 1pm to 11pm. Kāinga Ora received complaints from private owners that the tenant was playing music so loud that the neighbouring house would shake. In addition, Ms Matthews would constantly argue and swear at people at the property. It was clearly audible beyond the boundary of the property.
On 2 April 2026, the landlord served a second anti-social behaviour notice on the tenant. This second notice relates to an incident that occurred on 27 March 2026 at approximately 2.15 pm. The landlord says that the tenant was involved in an altercation with her son. During the argument, the tenant’s son damaged furniture and the lounge door inside the property. There was excessive yelling and swearing that frightened the neighbours. As a result, the police were called. By the time the police attended, the tenant’s son was removed from the property by a neighbour who took him to another address. Photos or the damage and a police report were provided in evidence.
The third anti-social behaviour notice is dated 8 May 2026. The notice relates to incidents that occurred on 10 April 2026 and 13 April 2026. On Friday 10 April 2026 at 7pm the tenant was involved in an altercation with her son. They were seen and heard shouting and screaming. As her son left the premises he was seen to damage the neighbour’s letterbox.
Another incident occurred on Monday 13 April 2026 at 1.10pm, where the tenant was again yelling and screaming loudly from inside her home. There was also audible banging, smashing noises, and her son eventually left the property. On both occasions, the police were called and attended the property to speak with the tenant.
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 Act confirms that antisocial behaviour includes harassment or any act (whether intentional or not) that reasonably causes alarm, distress or nuisance that is more than minor.
I have taken into account the evidence presented by the parties as set out above.
I have determined that the landlord has established that anti-social behaviour has occurred on the premises by the tenant or a person on the tenancy with the tenant’s permission. The landlord has served notices on the tenant as required in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, 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 taking into account 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 tenancy is terminated immediately.
The landlord has also made an application for termination of the tenancy under s.56 RTA for a breach by the tenant of s.40(2)(c) RTA. As I have already terminated the tenancy under s.55A RTA, I am not required to consider the alternative application.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5517129 — Harassment at Unit/Flat Flat 2, 20 Berwyn Avenue, Takanini, Takanini 2112

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5517129 — Harassment at Unit/Flat Flat 2, 20 Berwyn Avenue, Takanini, Takanini 2112

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions