What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4717890?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Summer Te Mania Herbert at 1 Pateke Place, Bromley,

How much money was awarded in case 4717890?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4717890?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4717890?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9652096-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4717890?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Summer Te Mania Herbert at 1 Pateke Place, Bromley,

How much money was awarded in case 4717890?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4717890?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4717890?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9652096-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

1 Pateke Place, Bromley, Christchurch 8062 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4717890 — 14-day notice

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Order

The tenancy of Summer Te Mania Herbert at 1 Pateke Place, Bromley, Christchurch 8062 is terminated, and possession is granted to Braziers Limited as agent for Chembala Investments Limited, at 11.59pm on Thursday 14 December 2023.

The application for reimbursement of a contractor’s call-out fee is withdrawn.

Reasons

Ms Holdem represented the landlord. The tenant did not attend the hearing.

The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the tenant’s obligations.

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) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Where the breach is capable of remedy the landlord must first serve a notice on the tenant requiring them to remedy the breach within at least 14 days and establish that the tenant has failed to do so.

The tenant has breached their obligations by keeping a dog at the premises without the landlord’s consent and by having more than the permitted number of persons reside there.

The tenancy agreement provides for 2 persons to reside at the premises; there are now 5 persons residing in the 2-bedroom premises.

The landlord served 14-day notices on the tenant for both breaches, and the tenant did not remedy the breaches within the required period.

The tenant admits to keeping a dog at the premises as well as having more people reside there than permitted.

It would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy because the breaches have been on-going since June 2023 and the tenant will not agree to remove the dog or to reduce the number of persons residing at the premises.

The landlord withdrew an application for a contractor’s call-out fee. The contractor could not gain access due to the presence of the dog.

The landlord may claim the filing fee on this application if it makes a future application after taking possession of the premises. There is little point in making an order now.

With the landlord’s agreement, I have delayed possession by 28 days so the tenant can find a new tenancy.