What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5053310?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5053310?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5053310?

The primary dispute was Harassment. Related themes: Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5053310?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11259646-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5053310?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5053310?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5053310?

The primary dispute was Harassment. Related themes: Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5053310?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11259646-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 6, 14A Grace Street, Orakei, Auckland 1071 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5053310 — Harassment

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 18 th December 2024 via teleconference.

The tenant applied for cancellation of a breach notice that was issued on 20 th August 2024, order for restriction of the neighbour’s ability to have dogs and an order for removal of the neighbour’s security camera.

At the hearing, the landlord confirmed that the said breach notice had already been revoked. Therefore, that claim is not considered.

Under section 38(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”), a landlord must not cause or permit any interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the tenant in their use of the premises.

Breaching this obligation in circumstances that amount to harassment is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $3,000.00. See section 38(3) and Schedule 1A RTA.

Harassment means "to trouble, worry or distress" or "to wear out, tire, or exhaust" and "indicates a particular pattern of behaviour directed towards another person". MacDonald v Dodds, CIV-2009-019-001524, DC Hamilton, 26 February 2010.

Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied that it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. See section 109(3) RTA.

The tenant claimed that the neighbour’s dog was disturbing her reasonable peace and comfort.

The neighbour was an 85-year-old elderly and had 2 dogs that come when her daughter and her son-in-law visit.

After the tenant first made the complaint about the dogs barking on 4 th January 2024, the landlord investigated but found no evidence of any aggressive behaviour or excessive noise from the neighbour’s dogs.

Dog control also had visited the property but there were no issues or concerns found. The landlord also had enquired with other neighbours but was advised that they were not disturbed by the barking dogs. As a result, the landlord had no concerns with the neighbour having the dogs over.

At the hearing, the tenant played a recording of the dogs barking as evidence. However, I am not satisfied that the tenant has proven that this went beyond reasonable interference with the reasonable peace and comfort of the tenant’s use of the premises.

Therefore, this claim is dismissed.

In relation to the neighbour’s security camera, the tenant claimed that it was pointing directly into her home.

The neighbour had installed a camera for security purposes as someone had thrown a rock at her door previously.

Although the tenant claimed that the neighbour’s camera was pointing directly into the tenant’s house, when the tenant checked again during the hearing, she confirmed that the security camera was no longer pointing towards her house as she originally claimed.

As there are no concerns regarding the tenant’s breach of privacy any longer, the claim regarding the neighbour’s camera is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 18 th December 2024 via teleconference.

At the hearing, the landlord confirmed that the said breach notice had already been revoked. Therefore, that claim is not considered.

Breaching this obligation in circumstances that amount to harassment is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $3,000.00. See section 38(3) and Schedule 1A RTA.

The tenant claimed that the neighbour’s dog was disturbing her reasonable peace and comfort.

The neighbour was an 85-year-old elderly and had 2 dogs that come when her daughter and her son-in-law visit.

Therefore, this claim is dismissed.

In relation to the neighbour’s security camera, the tenant claimed that it was pointing directly into her home.

The neighbour had installed a camera for security purposes as someone had thrown a rock at her door previously.

As there are no concerns regarding the tenant’s breach of privacy any longer, the claim regarding the neighbour’s camera is dismissed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5053310 — Harassment at Unit/Flat 6, 14A Grace Street, Orakei, Auckland 1071

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5053310 — Harassment at Unit/Flat 6, 14A Grace Street, Orakei, Auckland 1071

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