What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5302270?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Paige Diana Meadows Boereboom at Unit/Flat 1, 491

How much money was awarded in case 5302270?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5302270?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5302270?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12190934-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5302270?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Paige Diana Meadows Boereboom at Unit/Flat 1, 491

How much money was awarded in case 5302270?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5302270?

The primary dispute was Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5302270?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12190934-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 1, 491 Gloucester Street, Linwood, Christchurch Tenancy Tribunal Case 5302270 — Harassment

Order

The tenancy of Paige Diana Meadows Boereboom at Unit/Flat 1, 491 Gloucester Street, Linwood, Christchurch 8011 is terminated, and possession is granted to Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities immediately.

Reasons

A representative of Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities (‘KO”) attended the hearing conducted remotely. The tenant was called twice on the number provided which KO stated was current as of 6 June 2025. On both occasions the calls went to answer phone. The hearing proceeded in the tenant’s absence. Two neighbours were called by KO to give evidence and had provided statements to the Tribunal together with video evidence.
The tenancy commenced on 7 June 2024. The 2 bedroomed unit is one of 12 units in a new KO complex. The tenant’s unit is at the front and there are 6 units down each side of a shared driveway. She lives there with her partner and previously her young children although they are no longer in her care. The occupants of the other units are mostly made up of young families with children.
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 and for breach of the tenant’s obligation not to interfere with the neighbours’ reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the landlord’s other tenants or neighbours. KO submission and evidence
KO claim the tenant has been disturbing the complex and neighbourhood with ongoing disruptive behaviour. The tenant has been issued with three Section 55A breach notices. They wish to end this tenancy for the safety of the neighbourhood. First incident
On 29 March 2025 at approximately 9:30 pm the tenant was seen jumping up and down on the top of a vehicle in the shared driveway, yelling and screaming. The tenant then had a further argument in her garden with a visitor to the property and again was heard screaming and yelling and climbing up onto the garden fence and jumping off. She was also seen running in front of vehicles and the police attended. When spoken to by KO the tenant agreed she had been jumping on the vehicle and was screaming and yelling. Video evidence was presented to confirm the account of this evening. Second incident
On 6 May 2025 at approximately 11:00 PM the tenant was involved in a fight that occurred outside her property in the shared driveway. There was loud shouting and swearing which disturbed the neighbours. The fight was between the tenant and visitors to the property. When spoken to by KO, the tenant confirmed she had been in a fight outside of the property and stated it was between her and another female. It was clear from the video evidence presented to support the events of the evening that the tenant initiated the fight and it continued for some time. There was also a window broken in the same incident which other neighbours went up to help clear up. Third incident
On 9 June 2025 at approximately midday, the tenant was fighting with a male inside the premises . The screaming and shouting was so loud the neighbours could hear the commotion and the fight then spilled out onto the shared driveway, with yelling and screaming continuing for some time between the tenant and the male. When spoken to by KO the tenant agreed she had had a disagreement but felt that everyone had disagreements.
Evidence was also given by the witnesses. One of the witnesses said that screaming and yelling is a regular occurrence by the tenant, that there are often large gatherings of other males outside the tenant’s premises in the shared driveway and the occupants of the complex feel intimidated to go outside with their children, have trouble getting out of the driveway and sometime cannot even get to their rubbish bins because of the obstruction and intimidation.
Following a request made by KO to the police for information regarding the tenant, the incident reports show that they have visited the premises on a number of occasions in response to calls but generally have not been able to engage with the tenant. Most recently as a result of a traffic stop on 24 June 2025 a search warrant was executed at the tenant’s address and the tenant and her partner where arrested and charged with multiple drug offences. Imitation firearms were found inside the car along with various drugs and gang Insignia. It is understood by KO the tenant is now residing elsewhere but they are not aware of the address. Findings
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 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.

Order

The tenancy of Paige Diana Meadows Boereboom at Unit/Flat 1, 491 Gloucester Street, Linwood, Christchurch 8011 is terminated, and possession is granted to Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities immediately.

Reasons

A representative of Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities (‘KO”) attended the hearing conducted remotely. The tenant was called twice on the number provided which KO stated was current as of 6 June 2025. On both occasions the calls went to answer phone. The hearing proceeded in the tenant’s absence. Two neighbours were called by KO to give evidence and had provided statements to the Tribunal together with video evidence.
The tenancy commenced on 7 June 2024. The 2 bedroomed unit is one of 12 units in a new KO complex. The tenant’s unit is at the front and there are 6 units down each side of a shared driveway. She lives there with her partner and previously her young children although they are no longer in her care. The occupants of the other units are mostly made up of young families with children.
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 and for breach of the tenant’s obligation not to interfere with the neighbours’ reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the landlord’s other tenants or neighbours. KO submission and evidence
KO claim the tenant has been disturbing the complex and neighbourhood with ongoing disruptive behaviour. The tenant has been issued with three Section 55A breach notices. They wish to end this tenancy for the safety of the neighbourhood. First incident
On 29 March 2025 at approximately 9:30 pm the tenant was seen jumping up and down on the top of a vehicle in the shared driveway, yelling and screaming. The tenant then had a further argument in her garden with a visitor to the property and again was heard screaming and yelling and climbing up onto the garden fence and jumping off. She was also seen running in front of vehicles and the police attended. When spoken to by KO the tenant agreed she had been jumping on the vehicle and was screaming and yelling. Video evidence was presented to confirm the account of this evening. Second incident
On 6 May 2025 at approximately 11:00 PM the tenant was involved in a fight that occurred outside her property in the shared driveway. There was loud shouting and swearing which disturbed the neighbours. The fight was between the tenant and visitors to the property. When spoken to by KO, the tenant confirmed she had been in a fight outside of the property and stated it was between her and another female. It was clear from the video evidence presented to support the events of the evening that the tenant initiated the fight and it continued for some time. There was also a window broken in the same incident which other neighbours went up to help clear up. Third incident
On 9 June 2025 at approximately midday, the tenant was fighting with a male inside the premises . The screaming and shouting was so loud the neighbours could hear the commotion and the fight then spilled out onto the shared driveway, with yelling and screaming continuing for some time between the tenant and the male. When spoken to by KO the tenant agreed she had had a disagreement but felt that everyone had disagreements.
Evidence was also given by the witnesses. One of the witnesses said that screaming and yelling is a regular occurrence by the tenant, that there are often large gatherings of other males outside the tenant’s premises in the shared driveway and the occupants of the complex feel intimidated to go outside with their children, have trouble getting out of the driveway and sometime cannot even get to their rubbish bins because of the obstruction and intimidation.
Following a request made by KO to the police for information regarding the tenant, the incident reports show that they have visited the premises on a number of occasions in response to calls but generally have not been able to engage with the tenant. Most recently as a result of a traffic stop on 24 June 2025 a search warrant was executed at the tenant’s address and the tenant and her partner where arrested and charged with multiple drug offences. Imitation firearms were found inside the car along with various drugs and gang Insignia. It is understood by KO the tenant is now residing elsewhere but they are not aware of the address. Findings
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 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.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5302270 — Harassment at Unit/Flat 1, 491 Gloucester Street, Linwood, Christchurch

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5302270 — Harassment at Unit/Flat 1, 491 Gloucester Street, Linwood, Christchurch

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