VadeLab
AllowedTenancy Tribunal·

Tenant Must Clear Communal Corridor

Case No.

📌 In brief

The Tenancy Tribunal ordered a tenant to remove their belongings from a communal corridor to ensure safe evacuation routes. If the tenant does not comply, the landlord can charge up to $3,500.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant must keep common areas clear of obstacles to ensure safe evacuation routes.

Topics

health and safetytenant obligations

Provisions

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal ordered the tenant to remove belongings from a communal corridor.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tenancy Tribunal ordered the tenant to remove their belongings from a communal corridor to ensure safe evacuation routes. The landlord may charge up to $3,500 if the tenant fails to comply.

📚 Full judgment Official document

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5074649 1

[2025] NZTT 5074649

TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT REMOTE LOCATION | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA

APPLICANT: [redacted]

Landlord

RESPONDENT: [redacted]

Tenant

TENANCY ADDRESS: Unit/Flat [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

ORDER

1. The tenant must carry out the following work to the premises, which must be completed by 5pm on Thursday 13 March 2025:

a. Remove the tenant’s belongings, which are currently stored outside his unit in a communal walkway, from the walkway so that the corridor is free of obstacles and is kept clear as a means of escape from fire.

2. If the tenant fails to comply with Order 1 above, then the landlord may undertake the work and charge the tenant the reasonable cost of the work up to $3,500.00. These costs may be treated as rent in arrears and enforced accordingly.

Reasons:

1. The landlord attended the telephone hearing today. Calls to the tenant went to voicemail. The notice of hearing was sent to the tenant on 19 December 2024.

2. The landlord claims that the tenant has failed to keep the premises tidy and failed to ensure escape routes are kept clear. The landlord requests a work order with provision for the landlord to perform the work and charge the cost to the tenant if the tenant does not comply with the work order.

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5074649 2

3. A work order may authorise the landlord to undertake the work and charge the tenant the costs of doing the work, if the tenant fails to comply with the work order and any alternative monetary order. A monetary limit must be imposed by the Tribunal on the amount of costs that can be charged. These costs can be treated as rent in arrears and enforced accordingly. In this case, because the issue relates to health and safety, the Tribunal does not have to make an alternative monetary order.

4. The landlord provided photographs, taken today, which show belongings stored in the communal corridor. The walkway leads to adjoining units and is part of the shared areas of the apartment building. The photographs show a pram, a shopping trolley, several scooters, a washing machine, plants, a fridge, and a BBQ, amongst other items. Several appliances are plugged in and appear to be in use. The electrical wires are a trip-hazard. The belongings block about half the width of the corridor and mean that escape routes in the event of fire are potentially compromised.

5. I have made a work order. I have set the monetary limit at $3,500.00 which is an assessment based on what can be seen in the photographs. This is the maximum amount the landlord can charge the tenant for the cost of doing the work without seeking an amendment to this order.

[NAME]

27 February 2025

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5074649 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/

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5074649 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 tenant must remove belongings from the communal walkway to ensure safe evacuation routes.
  • The landlord can charge the tenant up to $3,500 if they fail to comply with the order.
  • The Tribunal recognized the importance of health and safety in this case.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • The tenant's failure to keep the premises tidy and ensure escape routes are clear was acknowledged.
  • The landlord's request for a work order was granted, indicating the tenant's actions were not upheld.
  • The presence of numerous obstacles in the communal corridor was deemed unacceptable.

Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The tenant must remove their belongings from a communal corridor to ensure safe evacuation routes.

What was the dispute about?

The landlord claimed the tenant had failed to keep the premises tidy and ensure escape routes were clear.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided the tenant must comply with the order to clear the corridor, citing health and safety concerns.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, section 54 was applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the need to ensure safe evacuation routes in case of fire.

Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?

The decision was for the landlord.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation should ensure that common areas are kept clear of obstacles to avoid similar orders.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Photographs showing belongings stored in the communal corridor were presented as evidence.

Official source: Tenancy Tribunal headnote and full judgment reproduced from the court's public records. View on the official source ↗Summary, holding, technical summary and questions: produced by Artificial Intelligence based on the official headnote and judgment. These are VadeLab’s own material and are not the work of the Court.This decision was issued by the Tenancy Tribunal and is reproduced from its published records. VadeLab is not affiliated with, and this page is not endorsed by, that court or tribunal.
Tenant Ordered to Clear Corridor | Tenancy Tribunal | VadeLab