What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5465994?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Vicky Jane Walker at 46 Hall Road, Sawyers Bay, Port Chalmers

How much money was awarded in case 5465994?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5465994?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5465994?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13384714-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5465994?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Vicky Jane Walker at 46 Hall Road, Sawyers Bay, Port Chalmers

How much money was awarded in case 5465994?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5465994?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5465994?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13384714-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

46 Hall Road, Sawyers Bay, Port Chalmers 9023 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5465994 — 14-day notice

Order

The tenancy of Vicky Jane Walker at 46 Hall Road, Sawyers Bay, Port Chalmers 9023 is terminated, and possession is granted to Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities immediately.

Reasons

The applicant attended the hearing by video link. The respondent did not attend or answer the phone.
The applicant submits that the respondent has breached the tenancy agreement by failing to reside at the tenancy address at 46 Hall Road, Sawyers Bay.
The respondent has been a tenant of the applicant since 10 July 2024. While rent has continued to be paid, the applicant’s evidence indicates that the respondent has not been living at the property for a sustained period.
Concerns regarding the tenancy first arose in May 2025 when the property was observed to be in a poor and untidy condition, including rubbish accumulation. Despite initial contact from the applicant, and a response from the respondent indicating an intention to remedy the situation, the condition of the property did not improve.
Subsequent inspections and visits in July, September, and October 2025 confirmed that the property remained in poor condition, with rubbish left on the driveway and no apparent occupation. Breach notices were issued and affixed to the property, and the applicant attempted to engage with the respondent through various means, including text messages, email, and in-person visits.
A Tenancy Tribunal application for a work order was made in October 2025 but did not result in resolution. The applicant continued efforts to contact the respondent, including contacting Police due to concerns for the respondent’s wellbeing.
On 14 November 2025, the applicant issued a 14-day notice requiring the respondent to return to and reside at the property or make contact. The applicant states that weekly visits have been made since that time, with no response. On one occasion in February 2026, a neighbour reported that the respondent briefly returned to the property but left before the applicant could attend.
As of the date of this order, the applicant has no evidence that the respondent has resumed occupation of the property. Breach notices remain affixed to the door and the property appears unoccupied.
The applicant therefore seeks termination of the tenancy and possession of the property on the basis of non-occupation.
Under section 56(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, the Tribunal may terminate a tenancy where a tenant has breached the tenancy agreement and, due to the nature or extent of that breach, it would be inequitable to refuse termination.
Where the breach is capable of remedy, the landlord must first serve a notice on the tenant requiring them to remedy the breach within a period of not less than 14 days. The Tribunal must then be satisfied that: a) the tenant has breached the tenancy agreement; b) the landlord served a valid 14-day notice specifying the breach; c) the tenant failed to remedy the breach within the required timeframe; and d) it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy in the circumstances.
I am satisfied on the evidence that the respondent has breached the tenancy agreement by failing to reside at the tenancy premises as required.
The applicant served a 14-day notice on 14 November 2025 requiring the respondent to return to the property or make contact. The respondent did not comply with that notice and has not remedied the breach.
The evidence shows ongoing and sustained non-occupation of the premises, a lack of engagement with the landlord despite repeated attempts, and continued failure to meet the obligations of the tenancy agreement.
In these circumstances, I am satisfied that the breach is of such a nature and extent that it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy.
Accordingly, the tenancy is terminated and possession of the premises is granted to the applicant.

Order

The tenancy of Vicky Jane Walker at 46 Hall Road, Sawyers Bay, Port Chalmers 9023 is terminated, and possession is granted to Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities immediately.

Reasons

The applicant attended the hearing by video link. The respondent did not attend or answer the phone.
The applicant submits that the respondent has breached the tenancy agreement by failing to reside at the tenancy address at 46 Hall Road, Sawyers Bay.
The respondent has been a tenant of the applicant since 10 July 2024. While rent has continued to be paid, the applicant’s evidence indicates that the respondent has not been living at the property for a sustained period.
Concerns regarding the tenancy first arose in May 2025 when the property was observed to be in a poor and untidy condition, including rubbish accumulation. Despite initial contact from the applicant, and a response from the respondent indicating an intention to remedy the situation, the condition of the property did not improve.
Subsequent inspections and visits in July, September, and October 2025 confirmed that the property remained in poor condition, with rubbish left on the driveway and no apparent occupation. Breach notices were issued and affixed to the property, and the applicant attempted to engage with the respondent through various means, including text messages, email, and in-person visits.
A Tenancy Tribunal application for a work order was made in October 2025 but did not result in resolution. The applicant continued efforts to contact the respondent, including contacting Police due to concerns for the respondent’s wellbeing.
On 14 November 2025, the applicant issued a 14-day notice requiring the respondent to return to and reside at the property or make contact. The applicant states that weekly visits have been made since that time, with no response. On one occasion in February 2026, a neighbour reported that the respondent briefly returned to the property but left before the applicant could attend.
As of the date of this order, the applicant has no evidence that the respondent has resumed occupation of the property. Breach notices remain affixed to the door and the property appears unoccupied.
The applicant therefore seeks termination of the tenancy and possession of the property on the basis of non-occupation.
Under section 56(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, the Tribunal may terminate a tenancy where a tenant has breached the tenancy agreement and, due to the nature or extent of that breach, it would be inequitable to refuse termination.
Where the breach is capable of remedy, the landlord must first serve a notice on the tenant requiring them to remedy the breach within a period of not less than 14 days. The Tribunal must then be satisfied that: a) the tenant has breached the tenancy agreement; b) the landlord served a valid 14-day notice specifying the breach; c) the tenant failed to remedy the breach within the required timeframe; and d) it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy in the circumstances.
I am satisfied on the evidence that the respondent has breached the tenancy agreement by failing to reside at the tenancy premises as required.
The applicant served a 14-day notice on 14 November 2025 requiring the respondent to return to the property or make contact. The respondent did not comply with that notice and has not remedied the breach.
The evidence shows ongoing and sustained non-occupation of the premises, a lack of engagement with the landlord despite repeated attempts, and continued failure to meet the obligations of the tenancy agreement.
In these circumstances, I am satisfied that the breach is of such a nature and extent that it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy.
Accordingly, the tenancy is terminated and possession of the premises is granted to the applicant.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5465994 — 14-day notice at 46 Hall Road, Sawyers Bay, Port Chalmers 9023

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5465994 — 14-day notice at 46 Hall Road, Sawyers Bay, Port Chalmers 9023

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