PHOTO: Kindel Media
Elderly Tenant Wins Tribunal Case After Unlawful Eviction by Whangaparāoa Landlords
An elderly tenant in Whangaparāoa has successfully taken his landlords to the Tenancy Tribunal after being unlawfully evicted following complaints about noise disturbances on their shared property. The case highlights ongoing issues with informal rental agreements and landlord obligations under New Zealand’s tenancy laws.
Tenant Complains of Noise, Landlords Retaliate
The tenant, whose identity was suppressed, moved into a cottage on the one-acre property in mid-2023. Landlords Donna and Keith Patterson resided in the main house while also renting out two caravans on the property. However, despite taking up residence, the tenant was never provided with a formal tenancy agreement.
Without a legally binding contract, the tenant did not receive crucial information regarding bond payments, tenancy conditions, insurance policies, or Healthy Homes Standards compliance.
In January 2025, the tenant told the Tenancy Tribunal that his quiet enjoyment was repeatedly breached by excessive noise from the landlord’s son playing drums, guitars, and using a boxing bag. Additional disruptions came from ride-on mowers, weed eaters, and earthwork machinery fixing a slip on the property. The tenant claimed that these disturbances interfered with his ability to take afternoon naps.
On December 15, 2024, after raising concerns about the noise, the tenant alleged that the landlords responded by telling him to “p*** off” if he was unhappy. Feeling unwelcome, he gave 14 days’ notice and moved out three days before Christmas.
Tenancy Tribunal Ruling: Unlawful Eviction
During the tribunal hearing, the Pattersons admitted they had not issued a formal written notice but confirmed they had intended for the tenant to leave. Tribunal adjudicator Michelle Pollack ruled that the landlords had unlawfully terminated the tenancy, failed to provide a written agreement, and had not complied with Healthy Homes Standards.
“The landlords have verbally purported to give the tenant notice without grounds in retaliation to his ongoing complaints,” Pollack stated. “I find the landlords have committed an unlawful act.”
The tribunal ordered the landlords to pay the tenant $3,719.86 in exemplary damages and rent compensation. However, claims of discrimination were dismissed due to insufficient evidence, and the tribunal noted that some level of noise is expected on a shared property.
Landlords Appeal the Decision
Donna Patterson has since appealed the ruling, arguing that the Residential Tenancies Act (RTA) does not apply to their situation as the tenant shared common areas such as the laundry and was considered a “flatmate.”
“The flat house share is not covered by the RTA; you don’t even have to have an agreement,” Patterson claimed. “It wasn’t until the hearing that we knew we were going to be judged on all these things.”
Despite the ruling, Patterson insists that the cottage met Healthy Homes Standards and that the tenant had never previously raised concerns about the property’s condition.
“We never told him he had to leave,” she added. “We just told him it was his choice, in that way. He gave notice on December 17 and left on December 22.”
This case serves as a reminder to landlords and tenants alike about the importance of clear tenancy agreements and adherence to tenancy laws in New Zealand.
SOURCE: NEWSTALK ZB