The allegations, most of which Lash said were not substantiated, date back to 2017 when complaint letters were sent to the council.
More than 10 letters were sent by the tenant about the alleged abuse, including a physical attack, but the council failed to "take all reasonable steps" when dealing with the tenant's claims.
"They appear to have dismissed the claims for lack of credibility at early stages," Lash said.
For this, compensation was justified and the council, as landlord, was ordered to pay the tenant $500.
"I would have expected WCC to have at least met with the tenant and X to address the complaints," Lash said in the decision.
The council told Open Justice it took the welfare of its tenants "exceptionally seriously" and would continue to review their responses in challenging situations.
"Particularly when there is conflict between tenants," a spokesperson said.
During the hearing, the council said it was satisfied it had dealt with all of the complaints from the tenant, and didn't have enough evidence to take them further.
It recommended on multiple occasions the tenant go to the police, however, reports were never presented.
"They say they are a responsible landlord and would be very surprised if they had not followed due process with all of the complaints," Lash said.
The tribunal said at times the council had taken a disproportionate amount of time to respond to the tenant's letters, and for that it had apologised.
Since the first complaint in 2017, a council employee had met with the tenant twice, written six letters in response to his complaints and had spoken on the phone twice.
Lash agreed with the council in that there was minimal evidence to substantiate the tenant's claims, but the relationship between the tenant and his neighbour was a bitter one.
"Clearly they are interacting in a way that is distressing to them both and causing issues," she said. "This has been occurring for a number of years and needs to be addressed."
In 2017 the tenant sent a letter to the council with concerns someone had a key to his apartment. He was assured this wasn't the case and was told to contact police.
In 2018 and 2021 the tenant made two unsuccessful applications to the Disputes Tribunal against his neighbour. Both were dismissed because of lack of evidence.
On July 9 last year the council told the tenant it wouldn't address the historical issues he was bringing up, and later that year issued a notice to him after he allegedly wrote abusive messages on his neighbour's mailbox.
He alleged "X" poisoned him by putting drain cleaner in his coffee, tea, smoothies, conditioner and moisturiser.
He said he noticed it when it happened, and had blood tests that confirmed the poisoning.
Other allegations included "X" regularly breaking into his apartment to move or steal items, breaking into his letterbox and intercepting courier deliveries, and knocking on his door and running away.
He said he was also physically assaulted by "X" and had to go to the hospital where police got involved.
Concerns with a second neighbour "Y", were primarily related to noise, and the tenant claimed "Y" would thump on the wall to harass him.
He said he had been to the police and noise control, which was recommended by the council, but there was no evidence of this presented at the hearing.
"I do not consider the complaints of someone breaking in, poising him and removing his belongings substantiated in any way," Lash said in the decision.
Lash said she was satisfied no person had taken a key to break into the tenant's flat, and his allegations were lacking credibility, however she accepted the behaviour of his neighbour was detrimental and making his life hard.
