A tenant adopted a cat to help her family grieve the loss of her father, but she was ordered to get the much-loved moggy out of the rental. Photo / 123RF
A tenant adopted a cat to help her family grieve the loss of her father, but she was ordered to get the much-loved moggy out of the rental. Photo / 123RF
A tenant who was told she was living in a “pigsty” by a housing support worker has been awarded $1000 in damages but has been ordered to get rid of her pet cat.
Kristen Gaunt was living in a property managed by Kahungunu Whānau Services (KWS) when she adopted the moggy as a way of helping her through the grief of losing her father.
Gaunt only realised pets weren’t allowed in the Wellington rental after she had already taken in the cat, so she sought permission from the landlord to keep it.
But KWS, an organisation that provides housing solutions and social support across the region, denied Gaunt’s request because of a blanket ban on pets.
According to a recently released Tenancy Tribunal decision, the day after Gaunt advised KWS about the cat she had a meeting with her support worker, who told her to get rid of the animal and that they would be making unannounced visits to ensure she complied.
Several weeks later, two representatives from KWS, including Gaunt’s support worker, showed up at the house to make a “cold call”.
Gaunt wasn’t home at the time, but her ex-husband told the tribunal the workers stood at the door and looked into the house. They allegedly called the place a “pigsty” and told him to get rid of the cat.
A month later the representatives visited again, the tribunal said. Gaunt was home this time and claimed one of the representatives was “scathing as to the state of the whare, indicating she thought they were hoarders”.
Gaunt recalled she was told if they didn’t get rid of the cat it would lead to eviction, the tribunal heard.
“Ms Gaunt says this visit left her hurt, embarrassed and scared, particularly as these comments were in front of her daughters,” tribunal adjudicator Kate Lash said.
“She felt like this was a covert property inspection and felt very vulnerable.”
A 14-day notice to remove the cat was given by KWS three months later, and Gaunt said she received calls and texts that made her feel harassed and upset and feared she would be evicted at any time.
The property was in the Wellington suburb of Tawa.
KWS said they were trying to support Gaunt in keeping her tenancy but the cat, which was still living at the house, breached her agreement.
It said it was standard in all tenancy agreements to make sure the rentals were kept well-maintained.
The organisation agreed one of the workers used the word “pigsty” but did so to emphasise the tenants couldn’t live in those conditions and wanted to make sure they kept their tenancy.
The support workers argued they were separate from the property branch of KWS and could make unannounced wellbeing checks, which meant there was no breach of the Residential Tenancies Act.
Lash disagreed and said anybody speaking to Gaunt on behalf of KWS about the tenancy represented the landlord, and they should abide by the Act, including giving notice for visits.
“I find that KWS have abused their position in these interactions and exacerbated the imbalance of power between them and Ms Gaunt,” Lash said.
Lash said KWS was entitled to decline Gaunt’s request to keep the much-loved family pet, and the tribunal had no jurisdiction to order a change in her tenancy agreement to include pets.
However, she said KWS’ conduct toward Gaunt breached the Residential Tenancies Act.
“Visiting unannounced and advising of an intention to do so clearly is a tactic that includes an implication of threat. A person will constantly be on alert that they could be visited at any time,” Lash said.
Photos and notes were taken at each visit, and Lash agreed with Gaunt the visits were “quasi-inspections” and calling the home a pigsty was “emotive, disrespectful and certainly unnecessary”.
“These visits were clearly in an effort to have her remove the cat, which could also be viewed as a process to ‘wear her down’.”
Gaunt was entitled to feel safe and supported in her rental, Lash said.
It was acknowledged KWS’ intention was to support Gaunt and it was a commendable and much-needed service provider in the community.
KWS social housing general manager Meyer Peteli told NZME it was the first time the organisation had come before the tribunal, and he accepted the language used could have been better.
Peteli described KWS as a kaupapa Māori wrap-around service, more than just assisting people in affordable housing, and the role the support workers, or kaimahi, played was to provide support in a holistic way using a te ao Māori approach.
This did, however, include helping tenants pass property inspections.
“People come to us in their time of need, and we tautoko them into housing or whatever their moemoea [aspirations] may be,” Peteli said.
“I can understand where she’s coming from, but it’s definitely hard when we have her best interest at heart.”
