How much money was awarded in case 4632070?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4632070?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4632070?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9391075-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 4632070?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4632070?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4632070?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9391075-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

9 Ann Street, Victoria, Rotorua 3010 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4632070 — Tenancy dispute

Q: What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4632070?

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

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Order

No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.

By consent tenancy of Sara Nicole McGahan at 9 Ann Street, Victoria, Rotorua 3010 is terminated, and possession is granted to Airedale Residential Limited As Agent For Landlord, at 12pm on Thursday, 14 September 2023.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

Upon testing, the Landlord discovered high levels of meth contamination during the tenancy.

The Landlord has supplied the results of pre-tenancy composite lab testing showing no methamphetamine contamination at the premises.

Individual sampling and testing has been completed.

The contamination levels are above 15mg/100cm 2 in several areas of the home.

The Tenant does not deny that there are people in her home who may have used methamphetamine.

The Landlord seeks termination on the basis of s 59A, which states: 59A Termination where breach renders premises uninhabitable (1) This section applies if, as a result of a breach of the tenancy agreement (whether for a fixed-term tenancy or a periodic tenancy) by a party, the premises are destroyed or are so seriously damaged as to be uninhabitable. (2) If the tenant is not in breach, the rent abates. (3) The party who is not in breach may give notice to the other party terminating the tenancy. (4) When a landlord gives notice of termination under this section, the period of notice is not less than 7 days. (5) When a tenant gives notice of termination under this section, the period of notice is not less than 2 days. (6) This section does not apply in relation to damage that is contamination by a contaminant if regulations prescribe a relevant method of testing for, and a relevant maximum inhabitable level of, that contaminant (but see section 59B).

The Landlord provided evidence that the contamination level is above the prescribed maximum inhabitable level of 15mg/100cm2 as stated in section 59A(6).

The Landlord has abided by the stipulated notice period under section 59A(4) by giving more than 7 days’ notice for termination.

The Tenant has failed to show any evidence to contradict the Landlord's findings.

For example, she has not disputed the methamphetamine contamination during the tenancy, volunteering that others who have come to her home may be responsible, particularly when she is out. She also gave evidence that Lifewise, a local provider or rehabilitation services, had ended their involvement with her. This is a strong indication that the Tenant is herself struggling with drug addiction.

However, the Landlord is not seeking to terminate the tenancy on the basis of any risk posed by drug use, by the Tenant or any other occupant of the premises.

Given the serious nature of the contamination and the risk it presents to the health and safety of future tenants and neighbours, the Landlord says it is reasonable to terminate the tenancy under section 59A. I agree.

The termination is done in good faith and in line with the requirements of s 59A.

Order

No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

Upon testing, the Landlord discovered high levels of meth contamination during the tenancy.

The Landlord has supplied the results of pre-tenancy composite lab testing showing no methamphetamine contamination at the premises.

Individual sampling and testing has been completed.

The contamination levels are above 15mg/100cm 2 in several areas of the home.

The Tenant does not deny that there are people in her home who may have used methamphetamine.

The Landlord provided evidence that the contamination level is above the prescribed maximum inhabitable level of 15mg/100cm2 as stated in section 59A(6).

The Landlord has abided by the stipulated notice period under section 59A(4) by giving more than 7 days’ notice for termination.

The Tenant has failed to show any evidence to contradict the Landlord's findings.

However, the Landlord is not seeking to terminate the tenancy on the basis of any risk posed by drug use, by the Tenant or any other occupant of the premises.

The termination is done in good faith and in line with the requirements of s 59A.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4632070 — Tenancy dispute at 9 Ann Street, Victoria, Rotorua 3010

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 4632070 — Tenancy dispute at 9 Ann Street, Victoria, Rotorua 3010

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Property management

Frequently asked questions