What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4920235?

The tribunal order states: This Order replaces the Order dated 7 October 2024. There was an error in the

How much money was awarded in case 4920235?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4920235?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4920235?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10963137-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4920235?

The tribunal order states: This Order replaces the Order dated 7 October 2024. There was an error in the

How much money was awarded in case 4920235?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4920235?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4920235?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10963137-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

11 Wellbeing Close, Woodhill, Whangarei 0110 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4920235 — Harassment

Order

This Order replaces the Order dated 7 October 2024. There was an error in the termination date in that Order. The

Reasons

for termination are unchanged.

The tenancy of Tangi Te Haruru Tuhiwai at 11 Wellbeing Close, Woodhill, Whangarei 0110 is terminated, and possession is granted to Kāinga Ora– Homes and Communities, at 12.00 noon on MONDAY 21 OCTOBER 2024. Reasons:
The application seeks termination of the tenancy on the grounds that Mr Tuhiwai caused an unreasonable interference with the peace, comfort, and privacy of his neighbours.
The second, in-person, hearing took place in Whangarei on 4 October 2024. Ms Gray represented Kāinga Ora. Mr Tuhiwai did not appear, and he did not appoint a representative for the hearing.
The hearing proceeded in Mr Tuhiwai’s absence.
The Tenancy Tribunal may make an order terminating a tenancy if: 1 1 Section 56 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”) a. A tenant breaches an obligation that they owe under the terms of the tenancy agreement or the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”); and b. In the case of a breach that is capable of being remedied, the landlord has given a notice to the tenant describing the breach and giving the tenant a reasonable period of time (not less than 14-days) to remedy the breach); and c. The breach was not remedied within the notice period; and d. The nature and extent of the breach is such that it would inequitable to refuse the request for termination.
Tenants have a legal duty to not cause any unreasonable interference with the peace, comfort, and privacy of their neighbours. 2
Kāinga Ora’s evidence shows that on multiple occasions during his tenancy, Mr Tuhiwai has directed verbal abuse and threatening language towards one of his neighbours. Mr Tuhiwai has also been verbally abuse to Kāinga Ora staff.
Some of Mr Tuhiwai’s outbursts were captured on video. This evidence was provided to the Tribunal.
People don’t always get on with their neighbours and I have no information about the reason for the antagonism between Mr Tuhiwai and this neighbour. I acknowledge that there are always two sides to a story. However, in this instance: a. Mr Tuhiwai has refused to engage with Kāinga Ora or with this Tenancy Tribunal process. Mr Tuhiwai has had ample opportunity to explain or contextualise his behaviour. He has not taken advantage of any of those opportunities. b. It is difficult to imagine a reason that could justify the type of behaviour shown in the videos provided to the Tribunal.
Mr Tuhiwai caused an interference with the peace comfort and privacy of this neighbour that is substantially beyond what is “reasonable”.
Kāinga Ora sent Mr Tuhiwai breach letters in March 2023 and April 2024.
I am satisfied that it would be inequitable to refuse to request the landlord’s request for termination having regard to the following factors: a. Mr Tuhiwai’s abusive language is at the extreme end of the scale. b. Mr Tuhiwai has also used threatening language. c. Mr Tuhiwai has been unrepentant. 2 Section 40(2)(c) RTA d. The behaviour has continued for over a year and half. There is no reason to think that it won’t continue, and possibly escalate.
The tenancy will terminate at 12.00 noon on Monday 21 November 2024.
Ms Gray asked the Tribunal to consider granting name suppression to the tenant.
The Tribunal must grant name suppression upon request to any party that has substantially succeeded in the proceedings. Mr Tuhiwai has not substantially succeeded in this instance.
The Tribunal also has a discretion to grant name suppression to any party, having regard to the interests of the party and to the public interest. In this instance: a. The Tribunal has not been informed of any particular privacy or security concern that could affect Mr Tuhiwai if his name was published. b. There is a genuine and legitimate public interest in the Tribunal naming persons who wilfully failed to meet their legal obligations as tenants or landlords.
The request for name suppression is not granted.

Order

This Order replaces the Order dated 7 October 2024. There was an error in the termination date in that Order. The

Reasons

for termination are unchanged.

The tenancy of Tangi Te Haruru Tuhiwai at 11 Wellbeing Close, Woodhill, Whangarei 0110 is terminated, and possession is granted to Kāinga Ora– Homes and Communities, at 12.00 noon on MONDAY 21 OCTOBER 2024. Reasons:
The application seeks termination of the tenancy on the grounds that Mr Tuhiwai caused an unreasonable interference with the peace, comfort, and privacy of his neighbours.
The second, in-person, hearing took place in Whangarei on 4 October 2024. Ms Gray represented Kāinga Ora. Mr Tuhiwai did not appear, and he did not appoint a representative for the hearing.
The hearing proceeded in Mr Tuhiwai’s absence.
The Tenancy Tribunal may make an order terminating a tenancy if: 1 1 Section 56 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”) a. A tenant breaches an obligation that they owe under the terms of the tenancy agreement or the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”); and b. In the case of a breach that is capable of being remedied, the landlord has given a notice to the tenant describing the breach and giving the tenant a reasonable period of time (not less than 14-days) to remedy the breach); and c. The breach was not remedied within the notice period; and d. The nature and extent of the breach is such that it would inequitable to refuse the request for termination.
Tenants have a legal duty to not cause any unreasonable interference with the peace, comfort, and privacy of their neighbours. 2
Kāinga Ora’s evidence shows that on multiple occasions during his tenancy, Mr Tuhiwai has directed verbal abuse and threatening language towards one of his neighbours. Mr Tuhiwai has also been verbally abuse to Kāinga Ora staff.
Some of Mr Tuhiwai’s outbursts were captured on video. This evidence was provided to the Tribunal.
People don’t always get on with their neighbours and I have no information about the reason for the antagonism between Mr Tuhiwai and this neighbour. I acknowledge that there are always two sides to a story. However, in this instance: a. Mr Tuhiwai has refused to engage with Kāinga Ora or with this Tenancy Tribunal process. Mr Tuhiwai has had ample opportunity to explain or contextualise his behaviour. He has not taken advantage of any of those opportunities. b. It is difficult to imagine a reason that could justify the type of behaviour shown in the videos provided to the Tribunal.
Mr Tuhiwai caused an interference with the peace comfort and privacy of this neighbour that is substantially beyond what is “reasonable”.
Kāinga Ora sent Mr Tuhiwai breach letters in March 2023 and April 2024.
I am satisfied that it would be inequitable to refuse to request the landlord’s request for termination having regard to the following factors: a. Mr Tuhiwai’s abusive language is at the extreme end of the scale. b. Mr Tuhiwai has also used threatening language. c. Mr Tuhiwai has been unrepentant. 2 Section 40(2)(c) RTA d. The behaviour has continued for over a year and half. There is no reason to think that it won’t continue, and possibly escalate.
The tenancy will terminate at 12.00 noon on Monday 21 November 2024.
Ms Gray asked the Tribunal to consider granting name suppression to the tenant.
The Tribunal must grant name suppression upon request to any party that has substantially succeeded in the proceedings. Mr Tuhiwai has not substantially succeeded in this instance.
The Tribunal also has a discretion to grant name suppression to any party, having regard to the interests of the party and to the public interest. In this instance: a. The Tribunal has not been informed of any particular privacy or security concern that could affect Mr Tuhiwai if his name was published. b. There is a genuine and legitimate public interest in the Tribunal naming persons who wilfully failed to meet their legal obligations as tenants or landlords.
The request for name suppression is not granted.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4920235 — Harassment at 11 Wellbeing Close, Woodhill, Whangarei 0110

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4920235 — Harassment at 11 Wellbeing Close, Woodhill, Whangarei 0110

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