What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4728009?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Saara Kelsey Spotswood at Unit/Flat 1, 37 Shakespeare Road,

How much money was awarded in case 4728009?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4728009?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4728009?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9724001-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4728009?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Saara Kelsey Spotswood at Unit/Flat 1, 37 Shakespeare Road,

How much money was awarded in case 4728009?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4728009?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4728009?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9724001-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 1, 37 Shakespeare Road, Bluff Hill, Napier 4110 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4728009 — Harassment

Order

The tenancy of Saara Kelsey Spotswood at Unit/Flat 1, 37 Shakespeare Road, Bluff Hill, Napier 4110 is terminated, and possession is granted to Rent-A-Home Limited - as agent for HB Rentals Limited, at 11:59pm on Sunday 17 December 2023.
Saara Kelsey Spotswood must pay Rent-A-Home Limited - as agent for HB Rentals Limited $20.44 immediately, being the filing fee on this application.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. Leave was given to the landlord to appear by teleconference as its representative has covid. The tenant did not attend.
The landlord has applied to the Tribunal for an order terminating this periodic tenancy on the grounds that the tenant, or someone on the premises with the tenant’s permission, has engaged in anti-social behaviour.
The landlord states that the anti-social behaviour is from repeated conflict at the premises including loud and disturbing yelling, swearing and use of abusive and offensive language, threats of violence and police attendances.
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 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) 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 has provided evidence of complaints and concerns raised with the landlord by neighbouring residents. It seems clear to me that these complaints come from several neighbouring residents, not just one. The complaints are consistent and note the serious impact on the neighbours’ quality of life from the behaviour of the tenant and others at the premises with her permission. The complaints note that the behaviour occurs at all hours. Concerns are consistently noted for their children’s’ exposure to the loud and abusive conflict.
I find 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 by the RTA, 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 issued, and given the period of time over which the evidence shows this behaviour has continued. I note too that the evidence shows continuation of the anti-social behaviour after the date on which the tenant was served with Notice that the landlord had made this application. That being so I can have little confidence that it will stop.
I do not consider that the landlord has acted in any retaliatory way in bringing this application. The landlord has responded appropriately to concerns raised by neighbours and has a duty to take reasonable steps to protect the peace comfort and privacy of its other tenants who are affected by the behaviour (s.45(1)(e)).
Section 56A(4) provides that I cannot take into account the impact that terminating the tenancy would have on the tenant.
Because Rent-A-Home Limited - as agent for HB Rentals Limited has succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Order

The tenancy of Saara Kelsey Spotswood at Unit/Flat 1, 37 Shakespeare Road, Bluff Hill, Napier 4110 is terminated, and possession is granted to Rent-A-Home Limited - as agent for HB Rentals Limited, at 11:59pm on Sunday 17 December 2023.
Saara Kelsey Spotswood must pay Rent-A-Home Limited - as agent for HB Rentals Limited $20.44 immediately, being the filing fee on this application.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. Leave was given to the landlord to appear by teleconference as its representative has covid. The tenant did not attend.
The landlord has applied to the Tribunal for an order terminating this periodic tenancy on the grounds that the tenant, or someone on the premises with the tenant’s permission, has engaged in anti-social behaviour.
The landlord states that the anti-social behaviour is from repeated conflict at the premises including loud and disturbing yelling, swearing and use of abusive and offensive language, threats of violence and police attendances.
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 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) 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 has provided evidence of complaints and concerns raised with the landlord by neighbouring residents. It seems clear to me that these complaints come from several neighbouring residents, not just one. The complaints are consistent and note the serious impact on the neighbours’ quality of life from the behaviour of the tenant and others at the premises with her permission. The complaints note that the behaviour occurs at all hours. Concerns are consistently noted for their children’s’ exposure to the loud and abusive conflict.
I find 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 by the RTA, 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 issued, and given the period of time over which the evidence shows this behaviour has continued. I note too that the evidence shows continuation of the anti-social behaviour after the date on which the tenant was served with Notice that the landlord had made this application. That being so I can have little confidence that it will stop.
I do not consider that the landlord has acted in any retaliatory way in bringing this application. The landlord has responded appropriately to concerns raised by neighbours and has a duty to take reasonable steps to protect the peace comfort and privacy of its other tenants who are affected by the behaviour (s.45(1)(e)).
Section 56A(4) provides that I cannot take into account the impact that terminating the tenancy would have on the tenant.
Because Rent-A-Home Limited - as agent for HB Rentals Limited has succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4728009 — Harassment at Unit/Flat 1, 37 Shakespeare Road, Bluff Hill, Napier 4110

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4728009 — Harassment at Unit/Flat 1, 37 Shakespeare Road, Bluff Hill, Napier 4110

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