What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4852102?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4852102?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4852102?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice. Related themes: Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4852102?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10300956-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4852102?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4852102?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4852102?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice. Related themes: Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4852102?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10300956-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

5666 Main West Coast Road, Springfield, Canterbury 7580 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4852102 — 14-day notice

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing by remote teleconference.

The landlord has applied for termination of Mr Hardaker’s tenancy for threatening to assault her.

The relevant part of section 55 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) states: s55 Termination on non-payment of rent, damage, or assault (1)Subject to subsection (2), on any application made to it under this section by the landlord, the Tribunal shall make an order terminating the tenancy if the Tribunal is satisfied that— (c)the tenant has assaulted, or has threatened to assault, or has caused or permitted any person to assault, or to threaten to assault, any of the following persons... (i) The landlord or any member of the landlord’s family.

The applicant is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.

The landlord alleges that the tenant threatened to put a bullet in her head. If that is proved, the RTA says that I shall terminate the tenancy, unless I am satisfied that it is unlikely that the tenant will commit a further breach of this kind. The other limbs of s55(2) RTA do not apply to this application.

The landlord says that on 3 April 2024 the tenant threatened to put a bullet in her head. The landlord reported this to the police on the same date and she was provided with a complaint reference number.

The landlord says that the tenant stood on his doorstep and was verbally abusive to her while she was setting up her café across the road in the morning.

The landlord says that the police have not charged the tenant with any offence.

The police served the tenant with two trespass notices in favour of the landlord – one for the landlord’s office address and one for the landlord’s home address.

The tenant denies the allegation.

He says that he did not threaten to put a bullet in the head of the landlord. He further stated during the hearing that these complaints have not been brought to his attention.

The landlord says there have been no further issues with tenant.

The landlord seeks immediate termination.

On balance, it was difficult for me to be satisfied that the tenant did threaten the landlord. There was no corroborative video or photographic evidence and no statements or affidavits from the landlord or any witnesses. And while the police were notified, no charges have been laid.

Where I have been unable to reconcile disputed or inconsistent evidence, I remind myself that the landlord has the onus of proving its claims. I also note the adjudicator’s comment in Wood and Dorrance v Rout [2021] NZTT Christchurch 4294149 “The standard of proof in a civil case such as this is the balance of probabilities. Where the allegation would amount to a criminal offence, there needs to be better evidence than would otherwise be needed for it to be proved. That is because criminal behaviour is less likely than non-criminal behaviour.”

Accordingly, the landlord’s application is dismissed.

Mr Hardaker should treat this as a warning that threats of violent or disruptive behaviour will not be tolerated. He runs the real risk of his tenancy being terminated if there are any further complaints in respect of his behaviour.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing by remote teleconference.

The landlord has applied for termination of Mr Hardaker’s tenancy for threatening to assault her.

The applicant is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.

The landlord says that the tenant stood on his doorstep and was verbally abusive to her while she was setting up her café across the road in the morning.

The landlord says that the police have not charged the tenant with any offence.

The police served the tenant with two trespass notices in favour of the landlord – one for the landlord’s office address and one for the landlord’s home address.

The tenant denies the allegation.

He says that he did not threaten to put a bullet in the head of the landlord. He further stated during the hearing that these complaints have not been brought to his attention.

The landlord says there have been no further issues with tenant.

The landlord seeks immediate termination.

Accordingly, the landlord’s application is dismissed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4852102 — 14-day notice at 5666 Main West Coast Road, Springfield, Canterbury 7580

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4852102 — 14-day notice at 5666 Main West Coast Road, Springfield, Canterbury 7580

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