What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5278326?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Jesseigh Matthews at 50A Bellingham Crescent, Fordlands,

How much money was awarded in case 5278326?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5278326?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5278326?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12150764-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5278326?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Jesseigh Matthews at 50A Bellingham Crescent, Fordlands,

How much money was awarded in case 5278326?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5278326?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5278326?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12150764-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

50A Bellingham Crescent, Fordlands, Rotorua 3010 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5278326 — 14-day notice

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing held today by telephone.

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 tenant has breached her obligations by:- a. Smoking inside the premises and continuing to do so when this is prohibited by the tenancy agreement; and b. Allowing additional people to continue to live at the house who are not authorised in the tenancy agreement.

The landlord served breach notices on the tenant on:- a. 10 March 2025 relating to the unauthorised people living at the house, and b. 5 May 2025 relating to smoking inside.

The notices gave the tenant at least 14 days to remedy the breaches.

The landlord’s representative gave oral evidence that she visited the property after the date specified in the breach notices and the tenant was seen smoking inside at that time.

The tenant said today in the hearing that:- a. She is still smoking inside the house and will continue to do so. She says this is because there is nowhere dry to smoke outside. b. Her daughter lives at the house with her and that no information has been given by the tenant to the landlord to assess whether her daughter can stay.

The evidence from the landlord and the admissions by the tenant mean that it is proven that the tenant did not remedy the breaches within the required period.

A landlord is entitled to prohibit smoking inside a rental property because smoking can lead to smoke alarms being tampered with which endangers lives and property. Smoking can also cause smoke and smell damage.

The landlord is a social housing provider and is required to review any new occupant of the premises as a condition of receiving funding. The Tribunal made a previous decision on 7 May 2025 not to terminate the tenancy for this reason but advised the tenant to provide her daughter’s details to the landlord. The tenant has not done so.

It would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy because the tenant does not intend to comply with these two conditions of the tenancy. She made this clear today.

There is high demand for social housing. It would be inequitable to allow the tenant to continue to breach essential terms of the tenancy agreement while there are others in need of housing.

Because Linkpeople Limited has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

No suppression orders apply. The public interest outweighs the interests of the parties as the landlord is a social housing provider so is a custodian of public funds and the tenant continues to breach the terms of her tenancy.

Reasons