What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5162853?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Laufou Leanne Aviata at 13A Bosun Place, Te Atatu Peninsula,

How much money was awarded in case 5162853?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5162853?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5162853?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11484759-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5162853?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Laufou Leanne Aviata at 13A Bosun Place, Te Atatu Peninsula,

How much money was awarded in case 5162853?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5162853?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5162853?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11484759-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

13A Bosun Place, Te Atatu Peninsula, Auckland 0610 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5162853 — Harassment

Order

The tenancy of Laufou Leanne Aviata at 13A Bosun Place, Te Atatu Peninsula, Auckland 0610 is terminated, and possession is granted to Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities, at 1pm 4 March 2025.

Reasons

Only the landlord attended the hearing. Calls to the tenant went straight to voice mail.
This was a period tenancy, which commenced on 13 June 2023. The tenant was the only legal occupant but her partner (with whom she appears to have fought occasionally) has sometimes occupied the property with her.
The landlord has applied to the Tribunal for an order terminating the tenancy on the grounds of anti-social behaviour from the tenant.
The landlord submits that Bosun Place is a short cul-de-sac of mostly privately owned homes. 13 and 13a Bosun Place are owned and tenanted by Kāinga Ora. The housing in the area is characterised by small homes on tiny sections.
The premises in the street are therefore all in close proximity. Noise travels easily.
The landlord gave evidence that the police have been called out to these premises 72 times and that on 66 of those occasions, the tenant has been listed as the victim.
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 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the RTA) 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 am satisfied that three notices have all been given within a 90 day time frame and that they comply with the requirements above.
The landlord has records of 25 complaints from various neighbours and occupants within the street in connection with disruptive behaviour at the premises since the commencement of the tenancy.
The three incidents the subject of this application occurred on 25 November 2024, 6 December 2024 and 17 January 2025. According to the landlord, details of each incident are as follows: (a)The first 55A notice was issued 28 November 2024 in response to an incident on 25 November 2024. On 25 November at approximately 5.35pm Ms Aviata could be heard yelling and swearing in the front of her home. Ms Aviata was swearing and yelling at her neighbour whilst throwing things at her fence. She then started striking her front door and window of her property with a shovel, breaking the glass. Police were called to the incident. (b)The second 55A notice was issued 16 December 2024 in response to an incident on 6 December 2024. On Friday 6 December at between about 6.45pm and 10pm Ms Aviata could be heard slamming doors, screaming and yelling and yelling at another occupant of the premises, Mr White. Police attended the incident; Mr White 1 had left the property before the Police arrived. (c)The third 55A notice was issued on 12 February 2025 in response to an incident on 17 January 2025. On 17 January about 3pm Ms Aviata could be heard engaged in a loud altercation with another occupant of the premises. Ms Aviata could be heard screaming, yelling, verbally abusing the other person and slamming doors.
I am satisfied after hearing from the landlord that each of these events took place and that the notices were duly sent. I note that Ms Aviata has not challenged any of the notices and has not appeared today to challenge the application.
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 RTA, 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. The landlord has been careful to understand their obligations under the RTA, to compile the required evidence, and to act in the interests of the close-knit community in seeking these orders.
I make orders terminating the tenancy. Non-Publication and suppression
The landlord has sought an order for suppression of the tenant’s name.
The grounds advanced are essentially the likely prejudice to the tenant’s mental health in the event of an adverse decision being associated with her name.
Section 95A of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that the Tribunal must, on the application of any party that has wholly or substantially succeeded 1 The tenant’s partner make an order that the decision not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the parties’ conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
Section 95A(4) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that the Tribunal may, on the application of any party to proceedings, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that all or part of the evidence given or the name of any party not be published.
The tenant has not made any application for suppression of her name but the terms of Section 95A(4) allow an application to be made by another party to the proceeding.
The landlord has provided no corroborative evidence supporting the assertion of likely prejudice to the tenant, or developed any submission as to why it is in the public interest for there to be an order for suppression of the tenant’s name.
I therefore decline to make any order for suppression or non-publication.

Order

The tenancy of Laufou Leanne Aviata at 13A Bosun Place, Te Atatu Peninsula, Auckland 0610 is terminated, and possession is granted to Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities, at 1pm 4 March 2025.

Reasons

Only the landlord attended the hearing. Calls to the tenant went straight to voice mail.
This was a period tenancy, which commenced on 13 June 2023. The tenant was the only legal occupant but her partner (with whom she appears to have fought occasionally) has sometimes occupied the property with her.
The landlord has applied to the Tribunal for an order terminating the tenancy on the grounds of anti-social behaviour from the tenant.
The landlord submits that Bosun Place is a short cul-de-sac of mostly privately owned homes. 13 and 13a Bosun Place are owned and tenanted by Kāinga Ora. The housing in the area is characterised by small homes on tiny sections.
The premises in the street are therefore all in close proximity. Noise travels easily.
The landlord gave evidence that the police have been called out to these premises 72 times and that on 66 of those occasions, the tenant has been listed as the victim.
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 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the RTA) 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 am satisfied that three notices have all been given within a 90 day time frame and that they comply with the requirements above.
The landlord has records of 25 complaints from various neighbours and occupants within the street in connection with disruptive behaviour at the premises since the commencement of the tenancy.
The three incidents the subject of this application occurred on 25 November 2024, 6 December 2024 and 17 January 2025. According to the landlord, details of each incident are as follows: (a)The first 55A notice was issued 28 November 2024 in response to an incident on 25 November 2024. On 25 November at approximately 5.35pm Ms Aviata could be heard yelling and swearing in the front of her home. Ms Aviata was swearing and yelling at her neighbour whilst throwing things at her fence. She then started striking her front door and window of her property with a shovel, breaking the glass. Police were called to the incident. (b)The second 55A notice was issued 16 December 2024 in response to an incident on 6 December 2024. On Friday 6 December at between about 6.45pm and 10pm Ms Aviata could be heard slamming doors, screaming and yelling and yelling at another occupant of the premises, Mr White. Police attended the incident; Mr White 1 had left the property before the Police arrived. (c)The third 55A notice was issued on 12 February 2025 in response to an incident on 17 January 2025. On 17 January about 3pm Ms Aviata could be heard engaged in a loud altercation with another occupant of the premises. Ms Aviata could be heard screaming, yelling, verbally abusing the other person and slamming doors.
I am satisfied after hearing from the landlord that each of these events took place and that the notices were duly sent. I note that Ms Aviata has not challenged any of the notices and has not appeared today to challenge the application.
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 RTA, 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. The landlord has been careful to understand their obligations under the RTA, to compile the required evidence, and to act in the interests of the close-knit community in seeking these orders.
I make orders terminating the tenancy. Non-Publication and suppression
The landlord has sought an order for suppression of the tenant’s name.
The grounds advanced are essentially the likely prejudice to the tenant’s mental health in the event of an adverse decision being associated with her name.
Section 95A of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that the Tribunal must, on the application of any party that has wholly or substantially succeeded 1 The tenant’s partner make an order that the decision not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the parties’ conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
Section 95A(4) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that the Tribunal may, on the application of any party to proceedings, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that all or part of the evidence given or the name of any party not be published.
The tenant has not made any application for suppression of her name but the terms of Section 95A(4) allow an application to be made by another party to the proceeding.
The landlord has provided no corroborative evidence supporting the assertion of likely prejudice to the tenant, or developed any submission as to why it is in the public interest for there to be an order for suppression of the tenant’s name.
I therefore decline to make any order for suppression or non-publication.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5162853 — Harassment at 13A Bosun Place, Te Atatu Peninsula, Auckland 0610

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5162853 — Harassment at 13A Bosun Place, Te Atatu Peninsula, Auckland 0610

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