What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4946774?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Sandy Heretura Martin at Unit/Flat 1, 16 Lismore Place,

How much money was awarded in case 4946774?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4946774?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4946774?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10873462-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4946774?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Sandy Heretura Martin at Unit/Flat 1, 16 Lismore Place,

How much money was awarded in case 4946774?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4946774?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4946774?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10873462-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 1, 16 Lismore Place, Papatoetoe, Auckland 2025 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4946774 — 14-day notice

Order

The tenancy of Sandy Heretura Martin at Unit/Flat 1, 16 Lismore Place, Papatoetoe, Auckland 2025 is terminated, and possession is granted to Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities, at 5pm 25 September 2024.

Reasons

Only the landlord attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the tenant’s obligations.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

The Tribunal may terminate a tenancy for breach where, due to the nature or extent of the breach, it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate. See section 56(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Where the breach is capable of remedy the landlord must first serve a notice on the tenant requiring them to remedy the breach within at least 14 days and establish that the tenant has failed to do so.
The background to this matter is that: a. In early May 2024, Kainga Ora began to suspect that Mr Martin was no longer living at the property. b. A notice to visit was issued on 2 May 2024 for a visit on 6 May. Mr Martin asked for the visit to the rescheduled as he was staying with his mother. c.An anonymous complaint was received that random unknown people were seen moving into the property with a number of large drums (barrels). d.The Housing Support Manager requested support from Police to undertake a visit to the property 13 June 2024. Police confirmed that it did not appear to be a burglary but did note the property was void of furniture. e.After the Police visit, the Housing Support Manager completed an inspection of the exterior of the property and noted a lot of damage. The external heat pump unit had been removed and the garage was full of inorganic rubbish. A copy of the inspection was provided to the Tribunal. It seemed from that inspection that no one was living at the property. f.The Housing Support Manager managed to speak to Mr Martin on the phone the same day. He said his intention was to not return to the property and that he would visit the Kāinga Ora office the following day and submit notice to end his tenancy. g.Mr Martin did not show at the agreed time. The Housing Support Manager issued a breach notice requiring Mr Martin to return to the property within 14 days. The breach notice was sent to Mr Martin by email, left in the letterbox and taped in a prominent position on the front door of the premises. h.No attempts at contact were successful from 13 June. i.The breach notice expired on 1 July 2024. An inspection was undertaken 1 July which confirmed that the breach notice was still attached to the front door and nothing else had changed. No one appeared to be living there. j.A further inspection was completed on 23 July. It concluded that: AD HOC completed under s48(2)(b) due to non-occupancy. SHSM visited property along with SHSM Anita F. The locksmith was onsite. No one answered the door so entry was gained through the locksmith. SHSM called out but no one was inside. The property was in a poor state. There was no furniture inside the house but had a fridge. The heat pump unit & HWC were missing. The kitchen sliding door along with the door frame was missing. A few holes in the house. The lawns were overgrown. The garage was filled with inorganics.
Clause 26 of the tenancy agreement provides that the tenant must stay resident at the premises. This provision is there for good reason. The applicant is a social housing provider which has other prospective tenants for whom housing is required. When a tenant is not residing at a premises, another prospective tenant is being denied the opportunity to live in that home.
Further, an unoccupied premises only attracts vandalism and theft, as in this case. There is inorganic rubbish that has been dumped in the garage, no furniture in the home, and someone has stolen the heat pump and the hot water cylinder.
I am satisfied there is nothing unlawful about clause 26 in this case.
I am also satisfied that the 14 day notice was served and that it has not been complied with. I find that Mr Martin has not returned to the home to live and I accept the evidence of Kainga Ora in this regard.
The tenant has breached his obligations by failing to return to live in the premises.
I find that it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy, for the reasons expressed above, at paragraphs 6 and 7

Order

The tenancy of Sandy Heretura Martin at Unit/Flat 1, 16 Lismore Place, Papatoetoe, Auckland 2025 is terminated, and possession is granted to Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities, at 5pm 25 September 2024.

Reasons

Only the landlord attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the tenant’s obligations.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

The Tribunal may terminate a tenancy for breach where, due to the nature or extent of the breach, it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate. See section 56(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Where the breach is capable of remedy the landlord must first serve a notice on the tenant requiring them to remedy the breach within at least 14 days and establish that the tenant has failed to do so.
The background to this matter is that: a. In early May 2024, Kainga Ora began to suspect that Mr Martin was no longer living at the property. b. A notice to visit was issued on 2 May 2024 for a visit on 6 May. Mr Martin asked for the visit to the rescheduled as he was staying with his mother. c.An anonymous complaint was received that random unknown people were seen moving into the property with a number of large drums (barrels). d.The Housing Support Manager requested support from Police to undertake a visit to the property 13 June 2024. Police confirmed that it did not appear to be a burglary but did note the property was void of furniture. e.After the Police visit, the Housing Support Manager completed an inspection of the exterior of the property and noted a lot of damage. The external heat pump unit had been removed and the garage was full of inorganic rubbish. A copy of the inspection was provided to the Tribunal. It seemed from that inspection that no one was living at the property. f.The Housing Support Manager managed to speak to Mr Martin on the phone the same day. He said his intention was to not return to the property and that he would visit the Kāinga Ora office the following day and submit notice to end his tenancy. g.Mr Martin did not show at the agreed time. The Housing Support Manager issued a breach notice requiring Mr Martin to return to the property within 14 days. The breach notice was sent to Mr Martin by email, left in the letterbox and taped in a prominent position on the front door of the premises. h.No attempts at contact were successful from 13 June. i.The breach notice expired on 1 July 2024. An inspection was undertaken 1 July which confirmed that the breach notice was still attached to the front door and nothing else had changed. No one appeared to be living there. j.A further inspection was completed on 23 July. It concluded that: AD HOC completed under s48(2)(b) due to non-occupancy. SHSM visited property along with SHSM Anita F. The locksmith was onsite. No one answered the door so entry was gained through the locksmith. SHSM called out but no one was inside. The property was in a poor state. There was no furniture inside the house but had a fridge. The heat pump unit & HWC were missing. The kitchen sliding door along with the door frame was missing. A few holes in the house. The lawns were overgrown. The garage was filled with inorganics.
Clause 26 of the tenancy agreement provides that the tenant must stay resident at the premises. This provision is there for good reason. The applicant is a social housing provider which has other prospective tenants for whom housing is required. When a tenant is not residing at a premises, another prospective tenant is being denied the opportunity to live in that home.
Further, an unoccupied premises only attracts vandalism and theft, as in this case. There is inorganic rubbish that has been dumped in the garage, no furniture in the home, and someone has stolen the heat pump and the hot water cylinder.
I am satisfied there is nothing unlawful about clause 26 in this case.
I am also satisfied that the 14 day notice was served and that it has not been complied with. I find that Mr Martin has not returned to the home to live and I accept the evidence of Kainga Ora in this regard.
The tenant has breached his obligations by failing to return to live in the premises.
I find that it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy, for the reasons expressed above, at paragraphs 6 and 7

Tenancy Tribunal case 4946774 — 14-day notice at Unit/Flat 1, 16 Lismore Place, Papatoetoe, Auckland 2025

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4946774 — 14-day notice at Unit/Flat 1, 16 Lismore Place, Papatoetoe, Auckland 2025

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions