One of Pets & Pats' vans in front of the house rented by dog day-care owner Angela Beer. Photo / Supplied
One of Pets & Pats' vans in front of the house rented by dog day-care owner Angela Beer. Photo / Supplied
The doggy daycare serving Auckland’s most sought-after suburbs enjoyed a clean sweep when it knocked over all the reasons its landlord said it should be evicted, according to the newly-released decision.
That was despite “statements from neighbours outlining the constant noise”, said adjudicator Joon Yi.
Yi found: “I accept thatthere was interference with the peace and comfort of the neighbours. However, the issue is whether it was to an unreasonable level.”
The new decision released today has left neighbours of Pets & Pats in Auckland’s rural Dairy Flat frustrated and upset at what they claim is excessive barking noise.
Pets & Pats is based in manor-like grounds in Auckland’s Dairy Flat where it offers day-stay and boarding facilities for dogs. It has a fleet of vans which pick up dogs from inner Auckland suburbs for a day in the country.
It has found itself mired in a string of cases in the justice system with its landlord trying to evict it, Auckland Council taking enforcement action alleging breaches of its resource consent and an Employment Court case taken by a former dog handler.
At the same time, owner Angela Beer has signalled a fresh attempt at a new resource consent to expand the business while claiming there was a “consistent strategy” of neighbours’ complaints that was “unreasonable”.
While the council’s enforcement action and Employment Court case remain unresolved, the Tenancy Tribunal decision was a firm rebuttal to efforts by Barfoot and Thompson to have Beer evicted.
The Herald reported the finding on Saturday but the full decision was not available until today.
It summarised the main case against Pets and Pats - which is registered as Teddy and Friends Limited - which included claims Beer was never given permission to operate the business and actively took steps to hide it from the landlord.
Yi’s decision found there was clear evidence showing the intent to operate the business from the time the tenancy began in 2015.
At the time, the tenancy was managed by Harcourts with evidence produced by Beer that “proved” the rental manager at the time “knew that the tenant was going to operate a business involving dogs at the premises”.
By the time the lease was renewed in 2019, the tenancy was being managed by Barfoot and Thompson.
The decision said it could have been “full knowledge of the business” was not passed to the property managers who took over the tenancy.
Yi’s decision found “the issue of whether the landlord knew of Pets and Pats only came about due to the increase in complaints by neighbours after the tenant started preparing to renew and extend the scope of the resource consent”.
Pets & Pats owner Angela Beer. Photo / Supplied
The decision also considered claims staff at Pets & Pats removed dogs ahead of property inspections to hide the existence of the business.
“I do not find that hiding the dogs for a few hours would have been enough to conceal the business from the property managers,” Yi found.
The Tribunal also dismissed claims the property was not being used primarily as a home and that the number of pets exceeded the three allowed in the agreement. The decision found the reference to the three dogs in the agreement was focused on pets and not visiting dogs.
Noise complaints from neighbours also failed to find traction with the tribunal after it accepted Pets and Pats’ argument that the “rural production” zoning of the neighbourhood and that no evidence from the landlord showed a breach of Auckland Council limits.
That was despite “numerous statements from neighbours outlining the constant noise from the operation of Pets and Pats”.
Pets and Pats produced two reports from acoustic testing companies while the landlord provided one report. Yi said none of the reports showed noise in excess of Auckland Council’s maximum levels for the zone.
It meant there was a “lack of evidence” to prove that the noise was excessive.
Pets & Pats general manager Liana Coleman greeted the decision of the tribunal with “delight” but said the business was not surprised by the outcome.
“We were vindicated of all claims. We are looking forward to 2023, where we will continue to provide professional, loving care for all our dogs.”
In contrast, neighbours of the business told the Herald the impact of barking of the festive season had impacted on their ability to enjoy the holiday period.
Neighbour Lindsey Field said: “Christmas and the New Year period was truly hell. I was beside myself. I’ll never have Christmas at home again with this business close by.
