What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4620610?

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

How much money was awarded in case 4620610?

Terminated And Possession Is Granted…: $20.44 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4620610?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4620610?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9318173-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4620610?

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

How much money was awarded in case 4620610?

Terminated And Possession Is Granted…: $20.44 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4620610?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4620610?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9318173-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat G09, 325 Victoria Avenue, Whanganui, Whanganui Tenancy Tribunal Case 4620610 — Harassment

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4620610. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
terminated and possession is granted to Home In Place (New Zealand) Limited, at 11.59 pm Friday 25 August 2023. 3. The t	$20.44		terminated and possession is granted to Home In Place (New Zealand) Limited, at 11.59 pm Friday 25 August 2023. 3. The t

Order

No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.
The tenancy of Shaelyn Ranginui-Matthews at Unit/Flat G09, 325 Victoria Avenue, Whanganui, Whanganui 4500 is terminated and possession is granted to Home In Place (New Zealand) Limited, at 11.59 pm Friday 25 August 2023.
The tenant is to pay $20.44 to the landlord immediately being reimbursement of the filing fee.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
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.
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.
The landlord provided copies of the following notices: a. 16 May 2023. “A complaint has been received that an unauthorised male residing at your unit has thrown chairs, a bong and used nappies into the neighbouring property and on their roof. Police arrived at the neighbouring property around 9.50 am to speak to them about the incident. Further correspondence advised that the male had thrown anything he could get his hands on, which included shoes, TV Remote, and a box with a frame in it. Threats of harm were made toward the management and staff of the neighbouring business after he was approached and asked to stop the activity, one item almost hit a guest of the neighbouring business.” This took place on 16 May 2023 from around 9.40 am to 11.15 am. b. 31 May 2023. “[The tenant] engaged in threatening and abusive behaviour involving [another tenant]... Reports stated attempts to instigate a fight between both parties was the purpose. There was yelling, screaming and swearing. This was witnessed by multiple tenants and was confirmed on CCTV footage. This took place on 31 May 2023 between 3.15 pm and 3.40 pm. c. 13 June 2023. “The unauthorised additional occupants that you have allowed to reside at our property have engaged in a domestic dispute today and attempts to gain access were made which included throwing items at the glass sliding door... The continued use of obscene language, shouting and yelling interferes with the peace, comfort and privacy of other tenants and neighbouring properties.” This took place on 13 June 2023 between
15 am and 9.30 am. d. 7 August 2023. “We received a report that three adult males at your unit engaged in swearing, yelling and making threats to harm others and were intimidating another tenant. A male at your unit also threw a cup of coffee at another tenant’s unit.” This took place on 5 August 2023 between 9.48 am and 11.30 am.
The landlord provided evidence of breach notices given on 16 May 2023, 26 May 2023, 4 July 2023, 31 July 2023 and 14 August 2023 requiring the tenant to remove unauthorised occupants from her unit.
The tenant confirmed that it was her friends who created the disturbances detailed in the Anti-social Behaviour Notices and that they were living in her unit. She explained that she now understood the seriousness of the complaints and that it was her responsibility to have made sure that such events did not keep occurring. She explained that there are other issues going on in her life which meant that she did not give the landlord’s notices the attention she should have.
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.
The actions of the tenant and her guests have reasonably caused alarm and distress that is significantly more than minor.
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 note that section 55A(4) RTA provides: “In deciding whether to make an order under subsection (2), the Tribunal must not take into account the impact that terminating the tenancy would have on the tenant.”
While I sympathise with the tenant’s difficult life situation, I am unable to take it into account in deciding whether her tenancy should be terminated. The tenant is to be commended for attending the hearing and owning up to her and her guests’ actions. Filing fee
Because Home In Place (New Zealand) Limited has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4620610. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
terminated and possession is granted to Home In Place (New Zealand) Limited, at 11.59 pm Friday 25 August 2023. 3. The t	$20.44		terminated and possession is granted to Home In Place (New Zealand) Limited, at 11.59 pm Friday 25 August 2023. 3. The t

Order

No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.
The tenancy of Shaelyn Ranginui-Matthews at Unit/Flat G09, 325 Victoria Avenue, Whanganui, Whanganui 4500 is terminated and possession is granted to Home In Place (New Zealand) Limited, at 11.59 pm Friday 25 August 2023.
The tenant is to pay $20.44 to the landlord immediately being reimbursement of the filing fee.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
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.
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.
The landlord provided copies of the following notices: a. 16 May 2023. “A complaint has been received that an unauthorised male residing at your unit has thrown chairs, a bong and used nappies into the neighbouring property and on their roof. Police arrived at the neighbouring property around 9.50 am to speak to them about the incident. Further correspondence advised that the male had thrown anything he could get his hands on, which included shoes, TV Remote, and a box with a frame in it. Threats of harm were made toward the management and staff of the neighbouring business after he was approached and asked to stop the activity, one item almost hit a guest of the neighbouring business.” This took place on 16 May 2023 from around 9.40 am to 11.15 am. b. 31 May 2023. “[The tenant] engaged in threatening and abusive behaviour involving [another tenant]... Reports stated attempts to instigate a fight between both parties was the purpose. There was yelling, screaming and swearing. This was witnessed by multiple tenants and was confirmed on CCTV footage. This took place on 31 May 2023 between 3.15 pm and 3.40 pm. c. 13 June 2023. “The unauthorised additional occupants that you have allowed to reside at our property have engaged in a domestic dispute today and attempts to gain access were made which included throwing items at the glass sliding door... The continued use of obscene language, shouting and yelling interferes with the peace, comfort and privacy of other tenants and neighbouring properties.” This took place on 13 June 2023 between
15 am and 9.30 am. d. 7 August 2023. “We received a report that three adult males at your unit engaged in swearing, yelling and making threats to harm others and were intimidating another tenant. A male at your unit also threw a cup of coffee at another tenant’s unit.” This took place on 5 August 2023 between 9.48 am and 11.30 am.
The landlord provided evidence of breach notices given on 16 May 2023, 26 May 2023, 4 July 2023, 31 July 2023 and 14 August 2023 requiring the tenant to remove unauthorised occupants from her unit.
The tenant confirmed that it was her friends who created the disturbances detailed in the Anti-social Behaviour Notices and that they were living in her unit. She explained that she now understood the seriousness of the complaints and that it was her responsibility to have made sure that such events did not keep occurring. She explained that there are other issues going on in her life which meant that she did not give the landlord’s notices the attention she should have.
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.
The actions of the tenant and her guests have reasonably caused alarm and distress that is significantly more than minor.
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 note that section 55A(4) RTA provides: “In deciding whether to make an order under subsection (2), the Tribunal must not take into account the impact that terminating the tenancy would have on the tenant.”
While I sympathise with the tenant’s difficult life situation, I am unable to take it into account in deciding whether her tenancy should be terminated. The tenant is to be commended for attending the hearing and owning up to her and her guests’ actions. Filing fee
Because Home In Place (New Zealand) Limited has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4620610 — Harassment at Unit/Flat G09, 325 Victoria Avenue, Whanganui, Whanganui

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4620610 — Harassment at Unit/Flat G09, 325 Victoria Avenue, Whanganui, Whanganui

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