Before a tenant with a penchant for gardening was raided by police, plumes of smoke could be seen coming from the chimney during a nine-hour police operation at the address.
Officers broke six windows and part of the roof in an effort to extract the man from the Wellington property in June last year.
The tenant, who can’t be named for legal reasons, had refused to leave the house and police were of the belief he was in possession of a gun.
While a Tenancy Tribunal decision doesn’t state what led police to surround the man’s rental property, it did say he was allegedly growing marijuana inside.
The plants, which he claimed to have been chillies, and the police raid have formed a part of a recently released decision issued by the rental watchdog.
Following the man’s eviction, his former landlord turned to the tribunal, seeking compensation for lost rent, delay in reletting the house due to damages and the alleged unlawful use of the rental property.
She claimed the man had damaged the carpet beyond repair in a bedroom due to plants being placed on the floor.
Damage caused by police during the operation was also his responsibility, she claimed, and delays in having it repaired had in turn delayed her ability to relet the house.
While a relative criminal charge of cultivating cannabis was dismissed, the Tenancy Tribunal found the man was “more likely than not” to have been growing weed at the property.
“He has admitted to using marijuana and the police seized items for growing and stripped plants,” the decision said.
Shortly before the man’s year-long tenancy ended last year, police raided the house following a lengthy attempt to remove him.
“His failure to present upon demand for approximately nine hours has meant that the police have had to take steps to force his exit.”
While the tenant accepted liability for the resulting damage, he maintained it was police who caused it.
“I find this argument untenable as the police caused the damage in an effort to have him present himself,” the tribunal ruled.
The landlord told the authority that when police were attempting to remove the man, she could see smoke coming from the chimney. She claimed it “smelt clearly of marijuana”.
“The smoke was copious, went on for a number of hours and she says she had complaints from neighbours about it,” the decision said.
“She [the landlord] says the police confirmed to her that they also suspected [the man] was burning his marijuana crop to avoid detection.”
He denied he was burning weed but admitted he smoked the drug during the police operation as it “was incredibly stressful for him”.
Once inside, police seized “numerous items that are typically used in the growing of marijuana”, the authority said.
In accepting he had damaged the carpet, the man said he was growing chilies - not marijuana - and described himself as a keen gardener.
But the tribunal wasn’t buying it.
“Taking into account the relevant evidential standard of the balance of probabilities, I find it more likely than not that [the tenant] was growing marijuana on the premise,” it ruled.
“Whilst I note that no criminal charges for these items were pursued, the evidential burden of proof in the Tenancy Tribunal is different to that in the criminal court which is the higher standard of beyond reasonable doubt.”
After being found responsible for all damages, the authority ordered the man to pay his former landlord $1360 compensation for the inability to rent the property and a further $500 due to the alleged illegal use of the property, namely cultivating cannabis.
The landlord’s claim seeking compensation for lost rent was dismissed.