What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4997671?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Zaham Mohamud Salah at 9A Collins Crescent, Feilding,

How much money was awarded in case 4997671?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4997671?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4997671?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10897128-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4997671?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Zaham Mohamud Salah at 9A Collins Crescent, Feilding,

How much money was awarded in case 4997671?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4997671?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4997671?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10897128-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

9A Collins Crescent, Feilding, Feilding 4702 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4997671 — Harassment

Order

The tenancy of Zaham Mohamud Salah at 9A Collins Crescent, Feilding, Feilding 4702 is terminated, and possession is granted to Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities, at 11.59 pm Friday 18 October 2024.

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— c. describing clearly which specific behaviour was considered to be anti- social and (if known to the landlord) who engaged in it; and d. advising the tenant of the date, approximate time, and location of the behaviour; and e. 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 f. advising the tenant of the tenant’s right to make an application to the Tribunal challenging the notice and; g. the landlord’s application to the Tribunal was made within 28 days after the landlord gave the third notice
The landlord has issued three notices within a 90-day period as required by section 50A Residential Tenancies Act (“RTA”). Each notice complies with the formal requirements set out in section 50A(2)(b) RTA.
Details of the notices are as follows: a. Notice 1. Issued 17 July 2024. On 10 July 2024 at 7.26 pm the Council attended the property with the police and seized a speaker as a result of noise complaints. b. Notice 2. Issued 1 August 2024. On 24 July 2024 around 4 pm “you were seen yelling, screaming and using threatening behaviour toward another neighbour living in this complex.... In addition, you were heard threatening to kill your neighbour.” c. Notice 3. Issued 27 August 2024. On 3 August 2024 in the late morning you were heard to “yell and verbally abuse a neighbour.” When a neighbour remonstrated with you, you responded with “you don’t know what I’m capable of. I’ll burn your ***** house down.”
The notices are supported by witness statements filed with the Tribunal.
The tenant has not challenged any of the landlord’s notices. The landlord’s notices each record that the tenant accepted that the incidents had occurred. At the hearing the tenant gave a similar acknowledgement and offered her apologies.
The landlord gave further evidence that: a. These notices have been issued by the landlord after a history of the tenant causing noise disturbances and the Council having been called to the property on numerous occasions. b. The Council has seized two speakers and issued five abatement notices. c. It believes that it has no alternative but to seek termination given the lengthy history of these disturbances and their significant nature. d. The neighbours are fearful for their safety with one neighbour refusing to return home. e. It has a duty to protect its neighbouring tenants.
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 taken into account the evidence presented by the parties as set out above.
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 discussed at the hearing, it is not appropriate to make an immediate termination order so that the tenant is given time to find a new home. The tenant needs to keep in touch with the landlord regarding her leaving the premises so that it does not have to take formal steps for her eviction.

Order

The tenancy of Zaham Mohamud Salah at 9A Collins Crescent, Feilding, Feilding 4702 is terminated, and possession is granted to Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities, at 11.59 pm Friday 18 October 2024.

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— c. describing clearly which specific behaviour was considered to be anti- social and (if known to the landlord) who engaged in it; and d. advising the tenant of the date, approximate time, and location of the behaviour; and e. 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 f. advising the tenant of the tenant’s right to make an application to the Tribunal challenging the notice and; g. the landlord’s application to the Tribunal was made within 28 days after the landlord gave the third notice
The landlord has issued three notices within a 90-day period as required by section 50A Residential Tenancies Act (“RTA”). Each notice complies with the formal requirements set out in section 50A(2)(b) RTA.
Details of the notices are as follows: a. Notice 1. Issued 17 July 2024. On 10 July 2024 at 7.26 pm the Council attended the property with the police and seized a speaker as a result of noise complaints. b. Notice 2. Issued 1 August 2024. On 24 July 2024 around 4 pm “you were seen yelling, screaming and using threatening behaviour toward another neighbour living in this complex.... In addition, you were heard threatening to kill your neighbour.” c. Notice 3. Issued 27 August 2024. On 3 August 2024 in the late morning you were heard to “yell and verbally abuse a neighbour.” When a neighbour remonstrated with you, you responded with “you don’t know what I’m capable of. I’ll burn your ***** house down.”
The notices are supported by witness statements filed with the Tribunal.
The tenant has not challenged any of the landlord’s notices. The landlord’s notices each record that the tenant accepted that the incidents had occurred. At the hearing the tenant gave a similar acknowledgement and offered her apologies.
The landlord gave further evidence that: a. These notices have been issued by the landlord after a history of the tenant causing noise disturbances and the Council having been called to the property on numerous occasions. b. The Council has seized two speakers and issued five abatement notices. c. It believes that it has no alternative but to seek termination given the lengthy history of these disturbances and their significant nature. d. The neighbours are fearful for their safety with one neighbour refusing to return home. e. It has a duty to protect its neighbouring tenants.
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 taken into account the evidence presented by the parties as set out above.
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 discussed at the hearing, it is not appropriate to make an immediate termination order so that the tenant is given time to find a new home. The tenant needs to keep in touch with the landlord regarding her leaving the premises so that it does not have to take formal steps for her eviction.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4997671 — Harassment at 9A Collins Crescent, Feilding, Feilding 4702

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4997671 — Harassment at 9A Collins Crescent, Feilding, Feilding 4702

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