A Rotorua pensioner housing tenant has been awarded nearly $5000 after their landlord failed to properly address concerns about a person on home detention moving in next door.
By Mathew Nash for Local Democracy Reporting
Emerge Aotearoa Housing Trust was ordered to pay the tenant $4942.50 in compensation after the Tenancy Tribunal found it did not do enough to respond to concerns raised over several months.
Emerge took over management of Rotorua Lakes Council’s pensioner housing in March.
About the same time, the man serving a home detention sentence moved in with a relative in a unit closely neighbouring the aggrieved tenant’s.
The man was subject to electronic monitoring with an ankle bracelet, and confined to the property.
The tribunal heard the tenant, whose identity is subject to suppression orders, became increasingly distressed by this arrangement and began raising concerns with Emerge in April.
Tenancy Tribunal adjudicator Mikail Steens found that while the tenant was not accusing the new neighbour of assault, harassment or threatening behaviour, the arrangement had a substantial impact on the tenant’s wellbeing.
The home detainee would use outdoor areas close to the tenant’s home to exercise and spend time with visitors.
As a result, the tenant withdrew from outdoor activities including gardening and exercise, and increasingly isolated themselves indoors, Steens’ decision said.
At times, the tenant left Rotorua altogether and stayed elsewhere.
Evidence presented during the hearing showed the tenant’s concerns continued throughout April, May and June.
The tenant "lived in a constant state of panic and unease" waiting for news, the decision said.
The tribunal found that while Emerge took steps to try to manage the situation – eventually relocating the neighbouring tenant and family member in July – those efforts were insufficient and too late.
"The tenant’s own inherent dignity was overlooked," Steens said.
The decision acknowledged Emerge staff had been attempting to balance competing needs, but found the provider failed to take reasonable steps to protect the tenant’s right to peacefully enjoy their home.
Steens said the person serving a home detention sentence "should not have been living at the premises to begin with".
The tribunal ultimately found Emerge had breached the Residential Tenancies Act and awarded compensation for loss of use, quiet enjoyment, distress and alternative accommodation expenses.
Steens rejected a separate claim that Emerge’s actions amounted to harassment, finding staff had investigated the complaints, considered medical information and worked toward relocating the neighbouring household.
He said relocating them was "reasonable" and Emerge had clearly tried to resolve a "difficult" problem.
"The breach was the absence of adequate safeguards at the outset and effective interim measures once the interference [with her quiet enjoyment] became known," Steens found.
The tenant was granted name suppression due to the sensitive nature of personal and medical evidence presented during the proceedings.
The compensation reflected the tenant’s reduced use of the property and its amenity, costs for accommodation elsewhere and emotional distress.
Although the council was not a party to the case, the dispute occurred in council-owned pensioner housing.
The tribunal accepted the tenant’s evidence that the home detainee had previously used the property as a bail address, and that the council had previously committed to not allowing people serving home detention sentences in pensioner housing.
While the council told Local Democracy Reporting it could not comment on the specifics of the tribunal case at this stage, infrastructure and assets group manager Stavros Michael said it had no policy excluding people serving home detention sentences from its pensioner housing.
Michael said the council was committed to meeting its legal obligations and providing housing services in a fair and lawful manner.
Michael said Emerge was "responsible for day-to-day tenancy and operational matters", while the council retained "strategic oversight" as the property owner.
He said the council and Emerge worked closely together and discussed tenancy-related matters where appropriate.
"However, in order to protect the privacy of those involved, we are unable to comment on individual tenancy matters."
He said the council would not make further comment until the appeal process ended and a "final decision" was made.
In an update to councillors in September, council staff said 14 applications related to council pensioner housing remained with the Tenancy Tribunal, 10 of which were adjourned until late October.
Emerge Aotearoa was approached for comment.
- LDR is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air.
SHARE ME