Tenant Loses Tenancy After Denying Landlord Access
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal ended the tenancy of a tenant who refused to let the landlord enter the property for routine inspections, as ordered by the Tribunal. This decision was made under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant must permit the landlord access for routine inspections as ordered by the Tribunal.
📖 What the law says
This rule says that a landlord generally cannot enter a rented property without the tenant's permission. However, a landlord can enter to inspect the property between 8 AM and 7 PM, if they give the tenant 48 hours to 14 days' notice, and they can't do this more often than once every four weeks.
This rule allows the Tenancy Tribunal to end a tenancy if one party has broken the tenancy agreement or the Act. If the breach can be fixed, the party who complained must have given the other party a notice to fix it within at least 10 working days, and the other party failed to do so.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The tenancy was terminated due to repeated breaches of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal terminated the tenancy of the tenant for repeatedly denying the landlord lawful access to inspect the property, in breach of section 48(2) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5131768 1
[2025] NZTT 5131768
TENANCY TRIBUNAL - Remote Location
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: Unit/Flat [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. The tenancy of [NAME] at [Room Upstairs] Unit/Flat [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] is terminated and possession is granted to [COMPANY] immediately.
Reasons:
1. The Landlord attended the hearing.
2. The Landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the Tenant’s obligations.
Should the tenancy be terminated?
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. The tenant has breached their obligations by failing to permit the landlord access for a routine inspection as ordered by the Tribunal.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5131768 2
6. The Landlord served a 14-day notice on the Tenant on 15 November 2024, and the Tenant did not remedy the breach within the required period. The Landlord made visits to the premises on 18 November and was turned away. The Landlord returned by mutual agreement on 20 November, but the Tenant would not come to the door, despite a smashed ranchslider and window being visibly open.
7. It would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy because the tenant has repeatedly denied the landlord lawful access to inspect the property, in breach of section 48(2) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986. Despite the Tribunal's previous order requiring access on 14 January 2025, access was still not provided. Additionally, the tenant has failed to comply with their obligations regarding property maintenance and key return, further justifying termination.
8. The tenancy is terminated, and possession is granted to the Landlord.
[NAME]
13 February 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5131768 3
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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5131768 4
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 landlord served a 14-day notice to the tenant requiring them to allow access for a routine inspection.
- The tenant repeatedly denied the landlord lawful access to inspect the property, even after a previous order by the Tribunal.
- The tenant failed to comply with their obligations regarding property maintenance.
- The tenant failed to return keys as required.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The tenant's refusal to allow access for a routine inspection was not remedied within the required period.
- The tenant's failure to maintain the property and return keys was not addressed.
- The tenant did not provide any valid reason for denying access to the landlord.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The tenancy was terminated because the tenant repeatedly denied the landlord access to the property.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about the tenant's refusal to allow the landlord access to the property for routine inspections.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to terminate the tenancy because the tenant had breached their obligations under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 by denying access.
Which laws or rules were applied?
Sections 56(1) and 48(2) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The most important argument was that the tenant had repeatedly denied the landlord access to the property, which was a breach of their obligations.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the tenant who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure they comply with their obligations under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, including allowing the landlord access to the property.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The evidence included the landlord serving a 14-day notice and making multiple attempts to gain access to the property.