Tenant Must Remove Unauthorised Structures and Seek Consent
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal ordered a tenant to remove unauthorised structures such as a fence, lean-to, and garage extension. The tenant was required to return the property to its original condition and obtain consent from the landlord for any future modifications.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant must obtain consent from the landlord before making structural changes to the rental property.
📖 What the law says
This rule states that a tenant cannot attach anything permanent to the rental property, or make changes or additions, unless the tenancy agreement allows it or the landlord gives written permission beforehand. The landlord cannot unreasonably refuse this permission. A tenant can remove things they added before the tenancy ends, as long as it doesn't cause permanent damage to the property.
This rule gives the Tenancy Tribunal the power to resolve all disagreements between landlords and tenants that relate to tenancies covered by this Act. This includes deciding if a property is a residential tenancy under the Act and if a tenancy agreement exists.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal ordered the tenant to remove unauthorised structures and seek consent for future modifications.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal ordered the tenant to remove unauthorised structures including a fence, lean-to, and garage extension, and to restore the property to its original condition. The Tribunal ruled that the tenant breached the tenancy agreement by making structural changes without the landlord's consent.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5119576 1
[2025] NZTT 5119576
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT REMOTE LOCATION | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. By. 5 pm Wednesday 20 April 2025 the tenant is to:
a. Remove the fence, the lean-to and the garage extension.
b. Remove the materials used in their construction from the premises.
c. Return the premises to the condition they were in prior to the construction of the fence, lean-to and garage extension and make good any damage caused to the premises in removing the tenant’s alterations.
d. Make an application to the landlord for consent to the deck extension and to comply with any reasonable safety requirements the landlord may make before granting its consent.
Reasons:
1. Both parties attended the hearing by telephone.
2. The landlord’s application was for an order requiring the tenant:
a. To remove the fence he has constructed.
b. To remove the lean-to structure he has built along the side the garage.
c. To remove the roofing area he has attached to the front of the garage (“the garage extension”).
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5119576 2
d. To make the decking area safe and to obtain the written consent of the landlord to the extension to the decking area he has constructed.
3. The landlord provided photographic evidence of the structures which the tenant has built on the premises.
4. The tenant gave evidence that a prior property manager of the landlord gave him verbal consent to build the structures. He wanted the 1.8 meter front fence to keep his children safe, the lean-to on the garage for his tools and materials and the roof extension to the garage to extend his living space and provide protection from the rain.
5. The landlord gave evidence that:
a. Denied that it had ever given consent to the structures being built. It has searched its records and found no such evidence, nor evidence that consent was ever sought.
b. It believes the fence is unsafe as it is not properly braced or securely constructed. It does not comply with the landlord’s requirements for front yard fences which require a fence to be no more than 1.2 meters high for security reasons.
c. Neither the lean-to or the garage extension have consents from the local authority which would have been required because of the roof area and their impact on rainwater collection and drainage. They are both unsafe structurally. The garage extension also includes the provision of power via an extension cord and multi-plug which is also unsafe.
d. While it did not consent to the extension of the deck area, it will consider a retrospective application from the tenant.
e. It has issued a breach notice to the tenant on 15 November 2024 noting that the tenant was in breach of Clause 30 of the tenancy agreement by building structures without the landlord’s consent and requiring the tenant to remove the structures.
Discussion and decision
6. Neither the tenant nor the landlord have any evidence that the landlord consented to the structures being built. The tenant is therefore in breach of Clause 30 of the tenancy agreement and section 42 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
7. Because consent has not been obtained by the tenant for these substantial alterations to the premises, it is appropriate that the Tribunal make an order under section 77(2)(l) RTA requiring the tenant to remove the fence, the lean-to and the garage extension, to remove the materials used for their construction
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5119576 3
from the premises and to make good any damage the tenant’s alterations have caused to the premises.
8. If the tenant does not remove the fence, lean-to and garage extension by the date provided in this order, then the landlord has advised that it will make a further application to the Tribunal seeking a work order for their removal. This will inevitably involve significant cost for the tenant and he is to be encouraged to undertake the removal work himself without further delay.
9. The landlord indicated at the hearing that it may allow the deck extension to stay, provided the tenant made an application to it for retrospective consent and undertook whatever work the landlord considered was necessary to make the deck extension safe. The tenant is encouraged to make the application for consent and to comply with any further safety requirements the landlord may impose. Otherwise, the landlord may apply for its removal.
[NAME]
01 April 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5119576 4
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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5119576 5
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 was ordered to remove the fence, lean-to, and garage extension because no consent was obtained for these structures.
- The landlord's records showed no evidence that consent was ever sought or given for the structures.
- The fence was deemed unsafe and did not meet the landlord's height requirements for front yard fences.
- The lean-to and garage extension lacked local authority consents due to their impact on rainwater and drainage, and were structurally unsafe.
- The garage extension's power supply, using an extension cord and multi-plug, was considered unsafe.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The tenant's claim of verbal consent from a prior property manager was not supported by evidence.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tenancy Tribunal ordered the tenant to remove unauthorised structures and restore the property to its original condition.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about the tenant building structures without the landlord's consent, including a fence, lean-to, and garage extension.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the tenant must remove the unauthorised structures because the tenant did not obtain the necessary consent from the landlord.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, sections 42 and 77(2)(l) were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The most important argument was that the tenant did not have the landlord's consent to make the structural changes.
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 have the landlord's consent before making any structural changes to the rental property.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Photographic evidence of the unauthorised structures was presented by the landlord.