What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4810480?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4810480?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4810480?

The primary dispute was Harassment. Related themes: Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4810480?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10135354-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4810480?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4810480?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4810480?

The primary dispute was Harassment. Related themes: Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4810480?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10135354-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 3, 40 Queens Avenue, Frankton, Hamilton 3204 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4810480 — Harassment

Order

The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The applicant sought the removal of a neighbouring tenant for anti-social behaviour, compensation for security measures that she has paid for and compensation for lost wages, time, and effort.
The applicant is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.
A party who brings a claim to the Tenancy Tribunal must prove on the balance of probabilities (more likely than not) that their version of events took place. Interference with the reasonable peace and comfort,
The tenant claimed that another tenant of Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities who lived next door at 4/40 and her visitors were engaging in anti-social behaviour, disturbing her peace, and causing havoc.
This behaviour included parking cars which blocked her carport, coming and going throughout the night and early hours of the morning, slamming doors, loud music coming from cars and people knocking on her door and walking around her car late at night.
The tenant said that she had lived at the premises since 2016 and initially it was a nice place to be. This changed when a new tenant arrived at 4/40 with visitors who arrived all the time day and night. This caused and disruption to her sleep and to her feeling of security. She installed security cameras and was offered security lights by Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities which she accepted and had installed.
In support of that claim, the following evidence was produced. The tenant provided photographs from the security camera. Voice recordings were also provided but were unable to be played at the hearing. The tenant did not bring a laptop but assured the Tribunal that the recordings were just confirmation of all the photographs from the security camera.
The premises are a group of five homes which have a joint driveway. Each individual premises has a carport attached to it and there is a separate area for visitors parking. The tenant lives in 3/40 and is joined to the premises at 4/40 by the carport area. 3/40 is on the road frontage and every car that enters the common driveway passes where she lives.
The photographs provided show an individual walking in front of the tenants parked car multiple times and some cars parked in front of her driveway which would not allow her to move the car. The tenant said that these cars had gone by morning.
There was also a collection of photos showing people around her car and in the driveway area late at night or early in the morning. There were photos of cars with full beam lights which shine into her bedroom and multiple cars parked across the driveway.
The tenant was unable to record any car registration number plates due to the reflection from her security lights. The police informed her that they were unable to action any complaints without this evidence. The noise was not the kind that she was able to call the Council noise control about as it was slamming car doors, talking, knocking on her door and car music.
There were also photos of a child small child in her garage area which concerned the tenant as she believed she would be unable to see the child when she was driving. She believed the child was from the tenant at 4/40.
A tenant must not cause or permit interference with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of the landlord's other tenants or of anyone else living in the neighbourhood. See section 40(2)(c) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation in circumstances that amount to harassment is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $3,000.00. See section 40(3A)(d) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Harassment means "to trouble, worry or distress" or "to wear out, tire, or exhaust" and "indicates a particular pattern of behaviour directed towards another person". MacDonald v Dodds, CIV-2009-019-001524, DC Hamilton, 26 February 2010.
The photos provided do support the tenants claim that there is a lot of activity in the joint driveway area with times ranging from 2.28 am to 4:00pm in the afternoon. The tenants particular claim is with the person residing at 4/40. She believes that it is this tenant that has caused this disturbance by having visitors arriving at all hours. The tenant said that she did not believe that any of the other three tenants had this number of visitors at these times.
It is not disputed that the tenant has contacted Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities by phone and e-mail letting them know of her concerns about this behaviour and its effect it has had on her.
The tenant issued a breach notice on the 12 February 2024, for failing to ensure the neighbouring tenants do not interfere with her reasonable peace comfort and privacy. The remedy sought was to “monitor the situation and remove non tenants and the tenant as she is responsible for her visitors and privacy.” The expiry date of the 14-day notice was the 12 February 2024.
In response Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities visited the tenant at 4/40 and issued a breach notice on 26 January 2024. The breach notice was for visitors, parking issues and unauthorised persons at the property.
The tenant at 4/40 apologised for having people coming over and assured Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities that this would not continue. Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities gave this tenant one month to remedy. They said that if they have further complaints, they will act. The tenant confirmed at a follow up inquiry that things were good and that the tenant has not had many visitors since their initial discussions.
Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities also made their own inquiries with the Police and the Council to see if any complaints had been lodged. One complaint had been received by the police, but this did not involve the tenant at 4/40.
Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities said that this is a difficult situation for everybody. They have taken steps to breach the tenant and continue to work with her but without Police or Council complaints or further evidence they cannot establish who the guilty parties are.
Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities have offered for the tenant to enter the private sector rental market or a transfer to another property which they manage. Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities would pay for the costs of the transfer if the tenant decided to accept that option.
The tenant said that she does not believe it is her responsibility to move from a property that she has lived it for eight years, because it is not her that has caused the issues. She has only just received the offer of a transfer which she is considering.
While it is clear that the there is a series of disturbances at the premises, I find that the tenant has not established beyond a reasonable doubt that it is caused by the tenant at 4/40. Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities has taken steps to remedy this and have acknowledge that they will act on further complaints.
This claim is dismissed. Compensation
The tenant sought compensation for a security door that she installed at her own cost for her safety because of the behaviour occurring in the driveway and around her car and doorway.
An invoice and a quote were provided from Viking Security Doors and Screens. The first invoice was for a framed security door and two patio bolts dated 12 August 2021 and the quote was for a sliding door grill dated 26 January 2024. The tenant had sought reimbursement from Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities for the security door but was told this was not offered by them, but was provided with security lights.
The quote had not been accepted or actioned and the tenant is unable to claim for a cost that she has not incurred.
Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities said that the security door was installed a month before the tenant at 4/40 moved in.
The applicant has not satisfied me that it is more likely than not that her security concerns were caused by the action of the tenant at 4/40 and no other issues were raised.
This claim is dismissed. Loss wages/time/effort
The tenant sought compensation for lost wages lost because she has been sent home early by her employer because she is too tired from the sleepless nights caused by the disturbances at her address. A letter from her employer was provided in support of this. The tenant said that she used sick days and annual leave to cover this cost.
No times or dates of the periods she was not at work or copies of wages or calculations of the amount of lost wages were provided. Without this information the Tribunal is unable to consider or calculate compensation.
The Tribunal does not reimburse parties time preparing or attending the hearing.
This claim is dismissed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4810480 — Harassment at Unit/Flat 3, 40 Queens Avenue, Frankton, Hamilton 3204

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4810480 — Harassment at Unit/Flat 3, 40 Queens Avenue, Frankton, Hamilton 3204

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions