What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5473865?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Kawana Cassidy at Unit/Flat Unit 12, 10 Hauiti Road, Otahuhu,

How much money was awarded in case 5473865?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5473865?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5473865?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13586059-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5473865?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Kawana Cassidy at Unit/Flat Unit 12, 10 Hauiti Road, Otahuhu,

How much money was awarded in case 5473865?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5473865?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5473865?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13586059-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat Unit 12, 10 Hauiti Road, Otahuhu, Auckland 1062 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5473865 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Order

The tenancy of Kawana Cassidy at Unit/Flat Unit 12, 10 Hauiti Road, Otahuhu, Auckland 1062 is terminated, and immediate possession is granted to Community Of Refuge Trust.

The hearing is adjourned.

A further 210 minutes should be allowed for the next hearing of this matter, scheduled before me at this court on the next available date.

The applicant is to provide an updated evidence of their compensation claim at least 14 prior to the next hearing date.

Tenancy Services will notify the parties of the next hearing date. Background:

The applicant attended the hearing by video link. The respondent did not attend.

The applicant seeks termination of the tenancy pursuant to section 55(1)(b) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 on the grounds that the tenant has caused, or permitted another person to cause, substantial damage to the premises. The applicant also seeks termination pursuant to section 55(1)(c), alleging that the tenant has assaulted, threatened to assault, or permitted another person to assault or threaten to assault other persons, namely neighbouring tenants, through threatening and violent behaviour occurring at the property.

This tenancy commenced on 5 September 2024. In the year preceding the present application, the landlord reported numerous incidents involving the respondent’s conduct and provided evidence of repeated breaches of the tenancy agreement and ongoing anti-social behaviour associated with the tenancy.

The present application arises from an incident occurring on 17 March 2026. The applicant tells me that a gathering involving alcohol consumption and multiple visitors to the property ended in a violent melee involving an axe, machete, and spade. The applicant says extensive damage was also caused to the property.

While the precise sequence of events remains unclear, the applicant says the respondent told them that one of his visitors took an urn containing his mother’s ashes and smashed it on the concrete exterior of the property, which sparked the violence that followed and ultimately spilled into the complex common area and adjoining street. The applicant says one person was also struck by a vehicle during the escalation. Reporting by the New Zealand Herald further records that Hato Hone St John confirmed one person sustained injuries assessed as moderate to serious.

The Police report confirms that a violent altercation occurred at the property. Police declined to provide further details on the basis that the matter remains under investigation. Third-party video evidence provided to the Tribunal also depicts multiple individuals armed with weapons in the yard area.

The applicant has also provided witness statements from neighbouring tenants confirming the incident and describing the ongoing impact of the respondent’s conduct on other residents within the complex. Of the four units in the complex, two neighbouring tenants have since vacated and been relocated to alternative accommodation. The applicant says this occurred because those tenants no longer felt safe residing adjacent to the respondent. Evidence has also been provided that the remaining tenant has experienced adverse health effects as a result of the ongoing tension, intimidation, and anti-social behaviour associated with the tenancy.

The applicant says that when the property manager attended the property the following day, they observed the respondent together with approximately five other occupants at the premises. The property manager observed the group smoking from a glass pipe, which they believed contained methamphetamine. The applicant says the respondent has refused to meaningfully engage with the concerns raised, denies wrongdoing, and continues to behave in an aggressive and uncooperative manner.

The applicant further says they are not willing due to legitimate safety concerns, to enter the property following the incident. Nevertheless, considerable damage is observable from outside the premises, including damage to doors, windows, and other impact damage consistent with the violent altercation occurring on 17 March 2026.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Although the application is framed under section 55 on the grounds of substantial damage and violence, I am satisfied that the matter is more appropriately and straightforwardly determined under section 56 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986. Section 56 provides the Tribunal with authority to terminate a tenancy where a tenant has committed a breach of the tenancy agreement that is incapable of remedy and where it would be inequitable to refuse termination.

I am satisfied that, both on 17 March 2026 and throughout the preceding year, the respondent breached section 40(2)(b) of the Act by using, or permitting the premises to be used, for unlawful purposes, including the use of illicit substances and violent unlawful conduct occurring at the property.

Furthermore, I am satisfied that the respondent breached section 40(2)(c) of the Act, which prohibits a tenant from causing, or permitting, interference with the reasonable peace, comfort, and privacy of neighbouring tenants and persons residing in the surrounding area. The respondent’s persistent anti-social conduct, unlawful behaviour, intimidation, and association with violent incidents have substantially interfered with the quiet enjoyment and safety of neighbouring residents.

The evidence establishes that the respondent’s conduct has made it difficult for the landlord to sustain tenancies within adjoining units, has caused significant disruption within the neighbourhood, and has left neighbouring residents living in ongoing apprehension and fear due to the behaviour associated with the tenancy.

In those circumstances, I am satisfied the breaches are serious, ongoing, incapable of remedy, and that it would be inequitable to refuse termination of the tenancy.

Is the respondent liable for the compensation sought by the applicant?

The applicant seeks compensation for damage arising from the incident at the property. However, at this stage, the applicant’s claim for compensation is largely hypothetical, as the applicant has not been able to safely enter the premises following the incident and has therefore been unable to fully assess the nature and extent of the damage sustained and receive actual costings.

While there is evidence of visible damage to the exterior of the property, including damage to doors, windows, and other impact-related damage, I am unable to make compensation orders based on estimated or hypothetical costs.

The applicant has also made a claim for water rates arrears. At the hearing, I requested that the applicant provide an updated water summary. The applicant subsequently provided a summary of various tenant expenses, including rent arrears and estimated damage-related costs. However, it remains unclear exactly how much is claimed in relation to water charges and the period to which those charges relate. Accordingly, that aspect of the claim will also be determined at the adjourned hearing.

The applicant is required to provide further specificity regarding the damage sustained to the premises, the compensation sought, and the outstanding water charges at the next hearing. The applicant must file updated evidence, including invoices, quotations, photographs, water statements, or other supporting material, no later than 14 days prior to the hearing date to be allocated by Tenancy Services. The applicant must also serve a copy of that updated evidence on the respondent at the same time H Ben Fayed 12 May 2026

Order

The tenancy of Kawana Cassidy at Unit/Flat Unit 12, 10 Hauiti Road, Otahuhu, Auckland 1062 is terminated, and immediate possession is granted to Community Of Refuge Trust.

The hearing is adjourned.

A further 210 minutes should be allowed for the next hearing of this matter, scheduled before me at this court on the next available date.

The applicant is to provide an updated evidence of their compensation claim at least 14 prior to the next hearing date.

Tenancy Services will notify the parties of the next hearing date. Background:

The applicant attended the hearing by video link. The respondent did not attend.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

In those circumstances, I am satisfied the breaches are serious, ongoing, incapable of remedy, and that it would be inequitable to refuse termination of the tenancy.

Is the respondent liable for the compensation sought by the applicant?

Tenancy Tribunal case 5473865 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat Unit 12, 10 Hauiti Road, Otahuhu, Auckland 1062

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5473865 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat Unit 12, 10 Hauiti Road, Otahuhu, Auckland 1062

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Is the respondent liable for the compensation sought by the applicant?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Is the respondent liable for the compensation sought by the applicant?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions