“The right to quiet enjoyment, peace and privacy is at the heart of a tenancy,” Lee-Lewis said.
“After considering all the factors and accepting that the applicant felt upset and distressed over several years, I consider an award of $300 is justified.”
The landlord, Jawi Service Limited, owns and rents both properties, which share a driveway and are connected by a wall.
Over time the relationship between the tenant and the neighbour, referred to as A in the recent Tenancy Tribunal decision, broke down.
It was accepted by Lee-Lewis that a property manager did take some steps to remedy the situation but could have done more.
“They have failed to take all reasonable steps to prevent the neighbour interfering with the tenant’s reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy,” she said.
The tenant claimed her landlord allowed the neighbour to “repeatedly interfere” with her quiet enjoyment of the property. She said she had repeatedly complained by phone, email and during inspections but nothing was done.
She said the neighbour had demonstrated anti-social behaviour a number of times.
Examples given included the neighbour booting in her door, throwing a recycling bin at her car, driving fast down the shared driveway and almost hitting her kids, and parking their car so it blocked access to her garage.
A letter from the police was produced by the woman that listed four occasions where she had called them about the neighbour’s behaviour, as well as a letter from another neighbour.
Under the Residential Tenancies Act, it is the landlord’s obligation to not “permit any interference” and ensure tenants do not interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of other tenants.
“A landlord has a duty to take reasonable steps to manage such disputes, such as holding residents’ meetings,” Lee-Lewis said.
The property manager said they believed they had, in their view, taken all steps to ensure this duty was upheld, and most disputes arose from the shared driveway.
Emails to both the tenant and neighbour had been sent regarding the driveway, with one sent to the neighbour stating “I know it’s petty but I have to follow procedure”.
Evidence provided to the tribunal indicated a “long history of issues” between the two neighbours, and Lee-Lewis said it could not have been a healthy environment for any of the parties involved.
Lee-Lewis said she didn’t consider the landlord had ignored the problem, but stated they had not taken any steps to address the reported concerns until the tenant made an application to the tribunal.
“Given the number of years over which the applicant has been complaining about her neighbour, the absence of any 14-day notices or anti-social behaviour notices during that period indicates that, in this case, not all reasonable steps were taken by the landlord,” she said.
A separate claim regarding rent was argued by the tenant, who claimed she was paying more than her neighbour and shouldn’t be, but this was dismissed by Lee-Lewis.
Hazel Osborne is an Open Justice reporter for NZME and is based in Te Whanganui-a-Tara, Wellington. She joined the Open Justice team at the beginning of 2022, previously working in Whakatāne as a court and crime reporter in the Eastern Bay of Plenty.
