Foxton Constable loses tenancy spat with Police landlord

A senior constable lived right beside his Foxton station for 13 years. The Tenancy Tribunal says Police as his landlord were within their rights to have him shift. Photo/Google Maps

A long-serving policeman was asked to leave his police-owned home so it could be used to entice a new constable to the area.

Senior police constable Alexander Gulliver got a letter from his NZ Police landlord on January 16 saying his tenancy of the past 13 years was going to be terminated. He had 63 days to move out.

Gulliver, who has lived at the house beside the Foxton Police station since June 2009, feared finding other suitable accommodation in the district would be difficult so he went to the Police Association for support.

The association exchanged correspondence with Police about the issue and in March, Gulliver got a letter saying he did not have to move out after all - the notice to terminate his tenancy was being rescinded.

But by then he had already found a new house and shifted anyway.

He made claims to the Tenancy Tribunal about the notice of termination and about the amount of bond he was charged when he had first moved into the house.

The Tribunal has this month released its decision on those claims.

It dismissed his claim police did not have grounds to exit him from the house, finding in favour of police submissions that the tenancy was not solely a service one as Gulliver and his advocate argued but also a periodic one and therefore covered by two parts of the Residential Tenancies Act (sections 51 and 53), one of which allowed police to move him on.

The adjudicator also dismissed Gulliver's claim Police made him pay too much bond when he first moved in during 2009. Gulliver said he should not have paid more than four weeks' rent, which was $200, but he was made to pay $800.

The adjudicator found employers could base bonds on market rental rates – bonds did not have to be based on the lesser rents paid under service tenancies. Therefore $800 was within an acceptable range for a property in Foxton at the time, the adjudicator said.

A police spokesperson told Open Justice police own 214 residential properties throughout New Zealand.

"Most of these Police houses are located in areas where rental accommodation might otherwise be difficult for Police staff to procure.

"Police's housing policy dictates that houses should only be made available to staff on a temporary basis, with the intention being that there should be a regular turnover of Police tenants, to ensure that there is reasonable availability for new staff coming to areas that are otherwise hard to fill. Foxton is no longer identified as hard to fill.

The spokesperson said the termination notice was withdrawn because the property was no longer required for other purposes.

"Police acknowledges that our staff may properly choose to test Police decisions where they believe them to be unlawful. The Tenancy Tribunal has, in this case, confirmed the lawfulness of Police's actions."