What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4828697?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4828697?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4828697?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4828697?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10194986-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4828697?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4828697?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4828697?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4828697?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10194986-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

24A Reeve Street, Levin, Levin 5510 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4828697 — Harassment

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

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 served a notice on 30 October 2023, three notices on 15 December 2023 and then a further notice on 23 February 2023. Although the notices served on 15 December were within 90 days of the first notice, I am not satisfied that the landlord has properly complied with the provisions of section 55A for the following reasons: a. The notice given on 30 October 2023 is said to be the first notice, but then a notice given on 15 December 2023 regarding a CCTV camera is also said to be the first notice and it says that the 90-day period started on 20 October. b. Two further notices were given on 15 December 2023. Although they relate to different dates, it is not fair to a tenant that the first notice he is given of anti-social behaviour is on the same date as being advised that there have now been three notices in 90 days, the 90-day period began on 20 October, and he is being taken to the Tribunal for termination.

Accordingly, I am not satisfied that the landlord has served notices on the tenant as required in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 and the application for termination is dismissed.

The tenant is reminded to comply with his obligations under the Act and under the tenancy agreement. It may be that neighbours are causing him some distress, but that does not mean that the landlord does not have grounds to bring another application for termination against him.

If the tenant disputes the conduct alleged in any notice, he must bring an application to the Tribunal challenging the notice. If he does not do so, then the notice is valid.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

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.

Accordingly, I am not satisfied that the landlord has served notices on the tenant as required in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 and the application for termination is dismissed.

If the tenant disputes the conduct alleged in any notice, he must bring an application to the Tribunal challenging the notice. If he does not do so, then the notice is valid.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4828697 — Harassment at 24A Reeve Street, Levin, Levin 5510

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 4828697 — Harassment at 24A Reeve Street, Levin, Levin 5510

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions