How much money was awarded in case 4942136?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4942136?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4942136?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10657299-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 4942136?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4942136?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4942136?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10657299-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 1206, 38A Liverpool Street, Auckland Central, Tenancy Tribunal Case 4942136 — Harassment

Q: What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4942136?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Lee Maree Penewiripo at Unit/Flat 1206, 38A Liverpool Street,

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Order

The tenancy of Lee Maree Penewiripo at Unit/Flat 1206, 38A Liverpool Street, Auckland Central, Auckland 1010, Life Apartments is terminated, and possession is granted to Home In Place (New Zealand) Limited As Agent For Prakul Raj, immediately.

Lee Maree Penewiripo must pay Home In Place (New Zealand) Limited As Agent For Prakul Raj $27.00 immediately as reimbursement of the filing fee.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not.

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.

I have seen the notices issued by the landlord to the tenant on 11 th , 14 th and 15 th of July 2024. They were hand delivered to the tenant by the landlord.

I have determined 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 in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, 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 given. I cannot see that the landlord has acted in any retaliatory way in bringing this application.

I cannot consider the impact on the tenant, in making an order for termination of the tenancy.

As the landlord has wholly succeeded with the application, the tenant must reimburse the filing fee also.

Order

Lee Maree Penewiripo must pay Home In Place (New Zealand) Limited As Agent For Prakul Raj $27.00 immediately as reimbursement of the filing fee.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not.

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.

I have seen the notices issued by the landlord to the tenant on 11 th , 14 th and 15 th of July 2024. They were hand delivered to the tenant by the landlord.

I cannot consider the impact on the tenant, in making an order for termination of the tenancy.

As the landlord has wholly succeeded with the application, the tenant must reimburse the filing fee also.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4942136 — Harassment at Unit/Flat 1206, 38A Liverpool Street, Auckland Central,

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4942136 — Harassment at Unit/Flat 1206, 38A Liverpool Street, Auckland Central,

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions