Tenancy Terminated Due to Anti-Social Behaviour and Damage
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal ended a tenant's lease because of repeated anti-social behaviour and significant damage to the rental property, as ruled by the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant's tenancy can be terminated if they engage in anti-social behaviour or cause substantial damage to the premises.
📖 What the law says
This rule allows the Tenancy Tribunal to end a tenancy if the tenant has caused, allowed someone else to cause, or threatened to cause significant damage to the rental property. It also applies if the rent is overdue by at least 21 days, or if the tenant has assaulted or threatened the landlord or others connected to the property.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The tenancy was terminated due to anti-social behaviour and substantial damage to the premises.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal terminated the tenancy of a tenant due to repeated anti-social behaviour and significant damage to the premises, as per the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5167553 1
[2025] NZTT 5167553
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT HASTINGS | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA KI HERETAUNGA
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], Te Atatu South, Auckland 0610
ORDER
1. The tenancy of [NAME] at [ADDRESS], Te Atatu South, Auckland 0610 is terminated, and possession is granted to [COMPANY] As Agent For [NAME], immediately.
2. [NAME] must pay [COMPANY] as Agent for [NAME] $27.00 immediately being the filing fee on this application.
Reasons:
1. The landlord attended the hearing which was held by teleconference. Two attempts were made to phone the tenant on the number specified in the Notice of Hearing, which is also the number given by the tenant in the agreement, but she was unable to be contacted. The Notice of Hearing was duly served to the tenancy address and to the e-mail address for service given by the tenant in the agreement.
2. 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.
3. The landlord states that the anti-social behaviour is:
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5167553 2
a. On 25 January 2025, stealing water by using a robber pipe from [ADDRESS];
b. On 7 February 2025, fighting in the street with weapons (spade) and reversing a car into neighbour’s fence;
c. On 14 February 2024, burning items in a barrel in the back yard causing heavy smoke across neighbouring properties.
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. I find 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.
7. 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.
8. I cannot consider the impact on the tenant, in making an order for termination of the tenancy.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5167553 3
9. Even if the grounds for termination of the tenancy for anti-social behaviour were not established, the Tribunal would be required to make an Order for termination under s.55(1)(b) RTA which provides that, “…..the Tribunal shall make an order terminating the tenancy if the Tribunal is satisfied that…(b) the tenant has caused, or has permitted any other person to cause, or has threatened to cause, substantial damage to the premises.”
10. The landlord has provided a inspection report dated 13 February 2025 noting, “The property is generally in heavily damaged status, all windows have broken glass, rubbish was piled like a mountain in the back yard. One of the trees was also burnt. Kitchen walls have heavy graffiti, All bedroom doors are removed, holes are all over the place. Broken fence panel can be seen at the pool side. Back garage was opened and sign of people living in.”
11. The photos included with the report confirm that assessment of the condition of the property. The property manager who conducted the inspection gave evidence and confirmed that 20 windows were broken and that all the bedroom doors were removed and damaged. He notes that the garage was not part of the tenancy and was used to store owner’s belongings. When the inspection was done the garage was found to be open and the owner’s belongings gone, leading to a concern hat those belongings were the fuel for the fire found burning on the property when the inspection took place.
12. The evidence satisfies me that the tenant has caused or allowed substantial damage to the premises and the tenancy is terminated on that ground also.
13. The hearing was scheduled today to consider whether the tenancy should be terminated, as a first step. The landlord has obtained a quote for some repairs, based on the inspection photos. The property manager asks me to make an award of damages today in terms of that quote.
14. It is not yet known whether the landlord can or will make an insurance claim or what the outcome of any claim will be. It is also not yet known what further claims might be brought.
15. The property manager says that because the damage is intentional, the tenant’s liability is not limited (s.49B(1)(a)) in the same was as a tenant’s liability for careless damage, so the landlord is entitled to pursue the claim against the tenants irrespective of the position with insurance.
16. While the tenant’s liability is not limited for intentional damage, a landlord is only entitled to compensation for loss. If an insurance claim is brought, the landlord’s loss will be the excess payable on the claim so the insurance position is relevant information for the Tribunal’s determination of compensation claims.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5167553 4
17. My view is that the appropriate process is for the landlord to assess and quantify its losses after recovering possession of the premises and to bring a further claim in respect of those losses if it wishes to then.
18. [COMPANY] as Agent for [NAME] has succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
[NAME]
27 February 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5167553 5
Please read carefully: Visit justice.govt.nz/tribunals/tenancy/rehearings-appeals for more information on rehearings and appeals.
Rehearings You can apply for a rehearing if you believe that a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice has happened. For example: • you did not get the letter telling you the date of the hearing, or • the adjudicator improperly admitted or rejected evidence, or • new evidence, relating to the original application, has become available.
You must give reasons and evidence to support your application for a rehearing. A rehearing will not be granted just because you disagree with the decision. You must apply within five working days of the decision using the Application for Rehearing form: justice.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Forms/TT-Application-for-rehearing.pdf
Right of Appeal Both the landlord and the tenant can file an appeal. You should file your appeal at the District Court where the original hearing took place. The cost for an appeal is $260. You must apply within 10 working days after the decision is issued using this Appeal to the District Court form: justice.govt.nz/tribunals/tenancy/rehearings-appeals
Grounds for an appeal You can appeal if you think the decision was wrong, but not because you don’t like the decision. For some cases, there’ll be no right to appeal. For example, you can’t appeal: • against an interim order • a final order for the payment of less than $1000 • a final order to undertake work worth less than $1000.
Enforcement Where the Tribunal made an order about money or property this is called a civil debt. The Ministry of Justice Collections Team can assist with enforcing civil debt. You can contact the collections team on [PHONE] or go to justice.govt.nz/fines/civil-debt for forms and information.
Notice to a party ordered to pay money or vacate premises, etc. Failure to comply with any order may result in substantial additional costs for enforcement. It may also involve being ordered to appear in the District Court for an examination of your means or seizure of your property.
If you require further help or information regarding this matter, visit tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing- decisions or phone Tenancy Services on [PHONE].
Mēna ka hiahia koe ki ētahi atu awhina, kōrero ranei mo tēnei take, haere ki tenei ipurangi tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions, waea atu ki Ratonga Takirua ma runga [PHONE] ranei.
https://www.justice.govt.nz/tribunals/tenancy/rehearings-appeals https://www.justice.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Forms/TT-Application-for-rehearing.pdf https://www.justice.govt.nz/tribunals/tenancy/rehearings-appeals/ https://www.justice.govt.nz/fines/about-civil-debt/ https://www.tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions https://www.tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions http://www.tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5167553 6
A manaomia nisi faamatalaga poo se fesoasoani, e uiga i lau mataupu, asiasi ifo le matou aupega tafailagi: tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions, pe fesootai mai le Tenancy Services i le numera [PHONE].
Reasons:
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The tenant engaged in anti-social behavior multiple times within a 90-day period.
- The landlord provided clear written notices to the tenant about the anti-social behavior.
- The landlord showed that the tenant caused substantial damage to the premises.
- The landlord submitted an inspection report and photos confirming the extent of the damage.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The tenant could not be contacted during the hearing attempts.
- There were no defenses presented by the tenant against the allegations of anti-social behavior and damage.
- The landlord's application was made within the required timeframe following the last notice.
- The landlord's claim for termination was supported by evidence of both anti-social behavior and damage.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The tenancy was terminated due to repeated anti-social behaviour and significant damage to the premises.
What was the dispute about?
The landlord sought to terminate the tenancy due to the tenant's anti-social behaviour and damage to the property.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to terminate the tenancy because the landlord had provided sufficient evidence of the tenant's anti-social behaviour and damage to the premises.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, sections 54 and 55(1)(b) were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was the evidence of repeated anti-social behaviour and significant damage to the premises.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the landlord who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
For tenants engaging in anti-social behaviour or causing significant damage to the premises, their tenancy may be terminated.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence of anti-social behaviour and damage to the premises, including inspection reports and photographs, mattered.