Paul Curtis has been taken to the Tenancy Tribunal by his landlord, Kāinga Ora, because of the graffiti inside his New Plymouth rental and rubbish outside. Photo / Tara Shaskey
A Kāinga Ora tenant extensively graffitied the interior walls, doors and heatpump at his property with writing and drawings, including of skulls and a bulldog, and refused to remove it, claiming it was artwork.
But now Paul William Curtis, who has lived in the New Plymouth flat for the past three years and is at risk of eviction, says he is doing what he can to clean it up.
During his tenancy, the government landlord has issued multiple breach notices to him because of excessive rubbish at his property.
Now, another pile-up of outdoor rubbish and furniture, and the graffiti, has landed Curtis before the Tenancy Tribunal after Kāinga Ora applied for a work order and a conditional termination order because of the breaches.
The tribunal’s recent decision stated Curtis had until August 5 to remove the graffiti and the refuse, specifically a couch, a table, a pile of textiles and several wooden pallets, or he could be evicted.
When NZME visited Curtis on Thursday, more than a week after his deadline, the rubbish appeared to be gone, but a notable amount of graffiti inside remained.
However, Curtis claimed it was a vast improvement to what was previously plastered over his walls, saying he had made an effort to paint over it since receiving the tribunal’s order.
He acknowledged there was still more work to do and said he had plans to continue until it was all covered.
Curtis said there had been a lot of drawings on his walls, some of which he was responsible for, and some he considered artwork.
“First, I stuck a big skull on the wall, and then other people came along and just started tagging the place.
“It was just covered, the whole place was just covered.”
But Curtis claimed it was mostly others who had scribbled on his walls; some were welcomed visitors, others not so much.
“I go out and I get back and people have been in my house.”
He said one man had let himself in and kicked holes in his walls, and others had smashed his windows.
The rubbish on his property that Kāinga Ora had complained about was also not always his, Curtis claimed.
He said he had been trying hard to tidy the place up and considered himself a responsible tenant. The tribunal’s decision acknowledged that Curtis had previously “undertaken considerable tidy-up work outside”.
Curtis said he had word that his flat block would be demolished in the near future, and he hoped that Kāinga Ora would rehouse him.
“I find it hard getting into places,” he said.
Kāinga Ora said it could not comment.
“For privacy reasons, we don’t comment on our tenant’s situation and in most cases we do not comment on Tenancy Tribunal decisions.”
According to the tribunal’s decision, Curtis had been issued a notice to remove the graffiti in April.
But by the time of the tribunal hearing, held last month, it had not been done, leading to the work order and August 5 deadline.
The tribunal had relied on screenshots from Curtis’ TikTok account, provided by Kāinga Ora, which showed the inside of his home, to determine the graffiti had not been cleaned up and that the breach was ongoing.
It was described as “widespread”, “very extensive”, and as intentional damage.
The decision said a property manager had earlier visited to check that it was being rectified but was stopped by Curtis from entering.
“The tenant swore at the property manager and would not let him enter, and the tenant told the property manager that he would not be remedying the position in relation to the graffiti as he regarded it as artwork,” the decision said.
The day before the hearing, another attempt was made by the property manager to enter, but this time with the assistance of police.
However, the police ended up advising against going in, and again, the inside of the property went unchecked, the decision said.
While the tribunal found that Kāinga Ora had not established grounds for termination, conditional or otherwise, on the basis of the rubbish, the graffiti was a different story.
But the decision said rather than proceeding with an immediate termination, Kāinga Ora wanted to allow Curtis to remove the rubbish and fix the graffiti damage, through the work order, which he has told NZME he has since been doing.
The tribunal found a conditional termination order was also not appropriate because it would need to determine at a further hearing whether the issue had been remedied.
If it was not, Kāinga Ora could request a further hearing to consider terminating the tenancy.
The decision said that a property manager would need to check the premises after August 5, and noted it would be a breach for Curtis to deny access if appropriate notice had been given.
Curtis told NZME that Kāinga Ora had yet to check if he had done the work, and he did not know if another hearing was set down.
Tara Shaskey joined NZME in 2022 and is currently an assistant editor and reporter for the Open Justice team. She has been a reporter since 2014 and previously worked at Stuff covering crime and justice, arts and entertainment, and Māori issues.