What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5250939?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Jo Edda Kuika Kohere at 18 Rawhiti Road, One Tree Hill,

How much money was awarded in case 5250939?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5250939?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice. Related themes: Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5250939?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11976535-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5250939?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Jo Edda Kuika Kohere at 18 Rawhiti Road, One Tree Hill,

How much money was awarded in case 5250939?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5250939?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice. Related themes: Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5250939?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11976535-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

18 Rawhiti Road, One Tree Hill, Auckland 1061 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5250939 — 14-day notice

Order

The tenancy of Jo Edda Kuika Kohere at 18 Rawhiti Road, One Tree Hill, Auckland 1061 is terminated, and possession is granted to Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities, at 11.59 am on Wednesday 18 June 2025.

Reasons

The landlord attended the remote hearing.
The tenant did not attend the hearing. Telephone calls were made to the tenant on the number provided at the allocated hearing time. All calls went to voicemail. The Tribunal may hear matters in the absence of a party where satisfied that notice of the hearing has been given. I am satisfied that notice of the hearing was given to the tenant.
The tenancy commenced on 3 January 2020 and is current.
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.
The landlord states that the anti-social behaviour is; • Numerous incidents of loudly swearing and yelling. • Threatening language addressed to neighbours. • The police attending the tenanted premises on a number of occasions.
Videos of the incidents occurring were provided by the landlord as well as a statement.
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 (‘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 have considered the evidence presented by the landlord 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.
The landlord has given 3 notices to the tenant since 31 January 2025. The behaviour relates to incidents that occurred from 25 January 2025 until 20 March 2025.
The landlord explained that the tenant’s behaviour has continued since the third notice was served. Video evidence was provided of a further incident on the 14th of April 2025, where the tenant and her partner yelled and swore loudly whilst standing on the front porch to the house, whilst waving a stick about in the air, seemingly attempting to strike the other party.
All of the notices are within 90 days of each other. I am satisfied that there have been 3 occasions whereby the tenant and or her partner have engaged in anti-social behaviour.
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. Other grounds for termination
The landlord has also applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the tenant’s obligations.
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) RTA.
Where the breach is not capable of remedy, the landlord is not expressly required to serve a 14-day breach notice on the tenant. A breach is not capable to remedy where the thing done, or its effect, cannot be undone.
However, unless the breach is serious, the Tribunal usually requires the landlord to have warned the tenant about the likely consequences of continued breach before it will exercise its discretion to terminate.
I record that even if I had not found that the landlord had made out the grounds pursuant to s.55A RTA, I would have ordered termination for the tenant threatening neighbours on 21 January 2025 (see s.55(1)(c)(v) and causing interference with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of any of the landlords other tenants, or any other person residing in the neighbourhood (s.40(2)(c) RTA ). Those grounds for termination do not require the landlord to give the tenant notice to remedy first. The tenant has breached their obligations by yelling threats to the neighbour on 25 January 2025. The threat is recorded in the video. The tenant can be heard yelling “you're going to get it while you sleep”. The videos provide evidence of the tenant’s ongoing loud swearing and yelling late into the night. This has resulted in the police arriving at the premises on more than one occasion. The tenant’s behaviour as recorded in the videos will no doubt have caused neighbours great distress.
The tenancy is terminated and possession granted to the landlord at 11.59 am on Wednesday 18 June 2025.
No order for name suppression is made.

Order

The tenancy of Jo Edda Kuika Kohere at 18 Rawhiti Road, One Tree Hill, Auckland 1061 is terminated, and possession is granted to Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities, at 11.59 am on Wednesday 18 June 2025.

Reasons

The landlord attended the remote hearing.
The tenant did not attend the hearing. Telephone calls were made to the tenant on the number provided at the allocated hearing time. All calls went to voicemail. The Tribunal may hear matters in the absence of a party where satisfied that notice of the hearing has been given. I am satisfied that notice of the hearing was given to the tenant.
The tenancy commenced on 3 January 2020 and is current.
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.
The landlord states that the anti-social behaviour is; • Numerous incidents of loudly swearing and yelling. • Threatening language addressed to neighbours. • The police attending the tenanted premises on a number of occasions.
Videos of the incidents occurring were provided by the landlord as well as a statement.
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 (‘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 have considered the evidence presented by the landlord 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.
The landlord has given 3 notices to the tenant since 31 January 2025. The behaviour relates to incidents that occurred from 25 January 2025 until 20 March 2025.
The landlord explained that the tenant’s behaviour has continued since the third notice was served. Video evidence was provided of a further incident on the 14th of April 2025, where the tenant and her partner yelled and swore loudly whilst standing on the front porch to the house, whilst waving a stick about in the air, seemingly attempting to strike the other party.
All of the notices are within 90 days of each other. I am satisfied that there have been 3 occasions whereby the tenant and or her partner have engaged in anti-social behaviour.
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. Other grounds for termination
The landlord has also applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the tenant’s obligations.
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) RTA.
Where the breach is not capable of remedy, the landlord is not expressly required to serve a 14-day breach notice on the tenant. A breach is not capable to remedy where the thing done, or its effect, cannot be undone.
However, unless the breach is serious, the Tribunal usually requires the landlord to have warned the tenant about the likely consequences of continued breach before it will exercise its discretion to terminate.
I record that even if I had not found that the landlord had made out the grounds pursuant to s.55A RTA, I would have ordered termination for the tenant threatening neighbours on 21 January 2025 (see s.55(1)(c)(v) and causing interference with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of any of the landlords other tenants, or any other person residing in the neighbourhood (s.40(2)(c) RTA ). Those grounds for termination do not require the landlord to give the tenant notice to remedy first. The tenant has breached their obligations by yelling threats to the neighbour on 25 January 2025. The threat is recorded in the video. The tenant can be heard yelling “you're going to get it while you sleep”. The videos provide evidence of the tenant’s ongoing loud swearing and yelling late into the night. This has resulted in the police arriving at the premises on more than one occasion. The tenant’s behaviour as recorded in the videos will no doubt have caused neighbours great distress.
The tenancy is terminated and possession granted to the landlord at 11.59 am on Wednesday 18 June 2025.
No order for name suppression is made.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5250939 — 14-day notice at 18 Rawhiti Road, One Tree Hill, Auckland 1061

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5250939 — 14-day notice at 18 Rawhiti Road, One Tree Hill, Auckland 1061

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