What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4617389?

The tribunal order states: No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression

How much money was awarded in case 4617389?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4617389?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4617389?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9232729-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4617389?

The tribunal order states: No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression

How much money was awarded in case 4617389?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4617389?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4617389?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9232729-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

92 Opaki Road, Lansdowne, Masterton 5810 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4617389 — Harassment

Order

No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.
The tenancy of Simoa Seymour at 92 Opaki Road, Lansdowne, Masterton 5810 is terminated, and possession is granted to Trust House Limited immediately.

Reasons

The landlord has applied to the Tribunal for an order terminating the tenancy on the ground of anti-social behaviour of the tenant.
The tenancy commenced in 2018. The landlord is Trust House Limited, and the tenant is Simoa Seymour.
More recently the landlord has issued notices to the tenant in relation to antisocial behaviour. Those are as follows: a. Notice one was issued on 12 June 2023, relating to: 8 minutes of loud and aggressive behaviour to the on-call housing officer causing alarm and distress. b. Notice two was issued on 26 June 2023, relating to: 15 minutes of screaming, yelling, threats and foul language to neighbours. Spitting at neighbour and her daughter. This leading to police being called and a trespass order being issued. 30-45 minutes of yelling, swearing at same neighbours over the fence. c. Notice three was issued on 28 June 2023, relating to: Loud shouting, abuse and swearing from backyard at neighbours bedroom windows, waking neighbours and causing alarm and distress. This went on for 41 minutes. Again the neighbours were woken at 3am to loud abusive language.
All notices record that the tenant has “the right to make an application to the Tenancy Tribunal challenging this notice”. No application has been made by the tenant.
The landlord now applies to the Tribunal for an order that the tenancy terminate. Landlords case
The landlords position is that there has been three notices of antisocial behaviour
The first issued on 12 June in relation to loud and aggressive phone call
The second notice was issued on 26 June following a complaint from the neighbour, which required a police attendance
The third notice was given on 28 June for similar behaviour again causing problems for the neighbours.
The landlord reports that since these notices were issued, there have continued to be multiple further complaints of antisocial behaviour.
In the circumstances the landlord is seeking to terminate the tenancy. Tenants case
The tenant opposes the application for termination, which as I understand the tenant, she disputes on the basis that the conflict with the neighbours was the result of the neighbours conduct.
I note for completeness that the hearing was challenging given frequent interruptions from the tenant. The approach taken by the tenant toward the landlord was aggressive and hostile at times. Relevant legal considerations
Section 55A of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), confirms that a landlord can apply to the Tribunal for an order terminating a periodic tenancy on the ground of anti-social behaviour, when: a. There has been 3 separate occasions of anti-social behaviour in connection with the premises, within 90 days. b. On each occasion the landlord has given the tenant a notice that: i. Describes the specific behaviour; and ii. Advised of the date and approximate location it occurred; and iii. Stating how many notices had been given; and iv. Advising the tenant of a right to challenge the notice in this Tribunal. c. The landlord’s application to terminate the tenancy must be within 28 days of the third notice.
Anti-social behaviour is defined in this section as follows: (7) In this section, anti-social behaviour means— (a) harassment; or (b) any other act or omission (whether intentional or not), if the act or omission reasonably causes alarm, distress, or nuisance that is more than minor.
However the Tribunal cannot make a termination order if in the circumstances of how the behaviour occurred, or the notices were given, it would be unfair to terminate, or if the landlord was issuing the notice in a retaliatory way, because the tenant was asserting some right or ability in relation to the tenancy.
The Act confirms that the Tribunal “must not take into account the impact that terminating the tenancy would have on the tenant”. Analysis
The landlord seeks an order that the tenancy terminate because of anti-social behaviour on the part of the tenant. I have set out the content of the notices above, along with the relevant legal considerations.
I have considered the behaviour set out in the notices, and I am satisfied that behaviour would amount to harassment and or behaviour that would reasonably cause alarm, distress, or nuisance that is more than minor, so would fall within the category of anti-social behaviour contemplated in section 55A.
At the hearing the tenant disputed being the instigator of the behaviour described with the neighbour. The problem for the tenant, is that there is a statutory presumption that the behaviour occurred when the notice is given, and if the tenant wants to dispute that the behaviour occurred as claimed, then she needed to file her own application with the Tribunal. If she did so, then the effect of section 55A(6) would then require the landlord to prove that the behaviour occurred as set out in the notice.
The notices were given on the template provided by Tenancy Services for section 55A notices, and they comply with the requirements in section 55A as it relates to content, and the other strict criteria that must be met in order for a termination to be ordered.
I am not persuaded that there are reasons present which would require the Tribunal to exercise a discretion and decline termination.
The application for termination of the tenancy due to anti-social behaviour is established, therefore the tenancy is terminated, and possession granted immediately to the landlord.

Order

No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.
The tenancy of Simoa Seymour at 92 Opaki Road, Lansdowne, Masterton 5810 is terminated, and possession is granted to Trust House Limited immediately.

Reasons

The landlord has applied to the Tribunal for an order terminating the tenancy on the ground of anti-social behaviour of the tenant.
The tenancy commenced in 2018. The landlord is Trust House Limited, and the tenant is Simoa Seymour.
More recently the landlord has issued notices to the tenant in relation to antisocial behaviour. Those are as follows: a. Notice one was issued on 12 June 2023, relating to: 8 minutes of loud and aggressive behaviour to the on-call housing officer causing alarm and distress. b. Notice two was issued on 26 June 2023, relating to: 15 minutes of screaming, yelling, threats and foul language to neighbours. Spitting at neighbour and her daughter. This leading to police being called and a trespass order being issued. 30-45 minutes of yelling, swearing at same neighbours over the fence. c. Notice three was issued on 28 June 2023, relating to: Loud shouting, abuse and swearing from backyard at neighbours bedroom windows, waking neighbours and causing alarm and distress. This went on for 41 minutes. Again the neighbours were woken at 3am to loud abusive language.
All notices record that the tenant has “the right to make an application to the Tenancy Tribunal challenging this notice”. No application has been made by the tenant.
The landlord now applies to the Tribunal for an order that the tenancy terminate. Landlords case
The landlords position is that there has been three notices of antisocial behaviour
The first issued on 12 June in relation to loud and aggressive phone call
The second notice was issued on 26 June following a complaint from the neighbour, which required a police attendance
The third notice was given on 28 June for similar behaviour again causing problems for the neighbours.
The landlord reports that since these notices were issued, there have continued to be multiple further complaints of antisocial behaviour.
In the circumstances the landlord is seeking to terminate the tenancy. Tenants case
The tenant opposes the application for termination, which as I understand the tenant, she disputes on the basis that the conflict with the neighbours was the result of the neighbours conduct.
I note for completeness that the hearing was challenging given frequent interruptions from the tenant. The approach taken by the tenant toward the landlord was aggressive and hostile at times. Relevant legal considerations
Section 55A of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), confirms that a landlord can apply to the Tribunal for an order terminating a periodic tenancy on the ground of anti-social behaviour, when: a. There has been 3 separate occasions of anti-social behaviour in connection with the premises, within 90 days. b. On each occasion the landlord has given the tenant a notice that: i. Describes the specific behaviour; and ii. Advised of the date and approximate location it occurred; and iii. Stating how many notices had been given; and iv. Advising the tenant of a right to challenge the notice in this Tribunal. c. The landlord’s application to terminate the tenancy must be within 28 days of the third notice.
Anti-social behaviour is defined in this section as follows: (7) In this section, anti-social behaviour means— (a) harassment; or (b) any other act or omission (whether intentional or not), if the act or omission reasonably causes alarm, distress, or nuisance that is more than minor.
However the Tribunal cannot make a termination order if in the circumstances of how the behaviour occurred, or the notices were given, it would be unfair to terminate, or if the landlord was issuing the notice in a retaliatory way, because the tenant was asserting some right or ability in relation to the tenancy.
The Act confirms that the Tribunal “must not take into account the impact that terminating the tenancy would have on the tenant”. Analysis
The landlord seeks an order that the tenancy terminate because of anti-social behaviour on the part of the tenant. I have set out the content of the notices above, along with the relevant legal considerations.
I have considered the behaviour set out in the notices, and I am satisfied that behaviour would amount to harassment and or behaviour that would reasonably cause alarm, distress, or nuisance that is more than minor, so would fall within the category of anti-social behaviour contemplated in section 55A.
At the hearing the tenant disputed being the instigator of the behaviour described with the neighbour. The problem for the tenant, is that there is a statutory presumption that the behaviour occurred when the notice is given, and if the tenant wants to dispute that the behaviour occurred as claimed, then she needed to file her own application with the Tribunal. If she did so, then the effect of section 55A(6) would then require the landlord to prove that the behaviour occurred as set out in the notice.
The notices were given on the template provided by Tenancy Services for section 55A notices, and they comply with the requirements in section 55A as it relates to content, and the other strict criteria that must be met in order for a termination to be ordered.
I am not persuaded that there are reasons present which would require the Tribunal to exercise a discretion and decline termination.
The application for termination of the tenancy due to anti-social behaviour is established, therefore the tenancy is terminated, and possession granted immediately to the landlord.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4617389 — Harassment at 92 Opaki Road, Lansdowne, Masterton 5810

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4617389 — Harassment at 92 Opaki Road, Lansdowne, Masterton 5810

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions