Pregnant couple threatened with eviction over newborn baby

A pregnant couple has won a huge victory against their ex-landlords after a tribunal revealed the outrageous reason they were threatened with eviction.

A pregnant couple was threatened with eviction if they brought their newborn baby back home, with a landlord telling them the child was not an “authorised occupant”.

The outrageous comments can be revealed following a successful racial discrimination case lodged by Jackson Gitau and Rose Ng’ang’a against their landlords in the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT).

It followed what the tenants alleged was a “campaign” by the owners – David Walsh and Leachia Boles – involving “surveillance, obstructing access and humiliating and offensive language” during their time at the unit.

Some of the vile comments involved Mr Gitau being called “a monkey” and a “bush n***a”.

A QCAT judgment has revealed the outrageous campaign mounted against a pregnant couple who were threatened with eviction if they brought their newborn baby home. Picture: Getty Images

Mr Gitau and Ms Ng’ang’a, who are from Kenya, argued the couple discriminated against them on the basis of pregnancy and race for months.

QCAT Member Jeremy Gordon agreed, ruling in favour of the tenants and finding the campaign against the pair started in March 2020.

A published QCAT judgment reveals Mr Gitau and Ms Ng’ang’a had a fixed-term tenancy with De Soysa Walsh Pty Ltd, a company owned by Mr Walsh, which began on June 11, 2019.

Their unit was one of six converted from a suburban house in North Brisbane. Mr Walsh and Ms Boles were joint owners of the block.

On December 20, 2019, Ms Ng’ang’a emailed Mr Walsh telling him she was pregnant and asking how she could break their lease, as the couple needed a larger place for their baby.

It was agreed the lease could be terminated once a new tenant was found, but no-one was found in time.

The couple’s baby was due on May 5, 2020 – six weeks before their tenancy was due to end.

On March 27, 2020, Mr Walsh emailed Mr Gitau stating the pair’s lease only authorised them as tenants.

“Your child, once born, is not authorised to be at the premises,” his email, tendered as evidence, reads.

The tenants were given a notice to leave without grounds the next day.

In another email sent days later Mr Walsh said: “Please inform me as to your intentions as bringing a child to reside at the premises is a serious breach of your lease that will result in my instigating eviction proceedings.”

A QCAT judgment found the landlords subjected the pregnant couple to a “campaign” involving racial and pregnant discrimination after they tried to break their lease to find new accommodation for their child. Picture: Supplied

Member Gordon found Mr Walsh and his company discriminated against the couple on the basis of their pregnancy by sending these emails.

He also found there was a campaign against the pregnant couple leading up to their child’s birth – something he said was “strongly influenced” by Ms Boles’ mistrust of the tenants because of their race.

This campaign included sending multiple breach notices for erroneous things like water being thrown off the balcony, bin collection and visits by an NBN contractor.

Member Gordon also found the owners ignored complaints from the tenants about water and power issues at the unit.

In evidence given at a hearing, Mr Gitau said he was called a “piece of s**t” by Mr Walsh and a “monkey” and a “bush n***a” by Ms Boles on various dates.

Ms Ng’ang’a said she was filmed by Ms Boles on several occasions, including her return from hospital – something Member Gordon said was “not justified at all”.

The judgment states Mr Walsh deliberately blocked access to the carport with a trailer and also locked the couple out of a laundry room.

Member Gordon accepted the tenants did not have a legal right to access this room but said it appeared to be a broader part of the campaign against the tenants.

Shockingly, Ms Boles – who describes herself as an “American N***o from Alabama” – gave evidence where she expressed a “mistrust and dislike of African men” and claimed the couple had acted with “pernicious racism” towards her.

This manifested in a mistrust of the tenants because they were from Kenya.

The court ruled in favour of the couple.

“She believes her views state the truth,” Member Gordon said.

“It can be seen she holds deeply held prejudices against, and stereotypical views about African people, and African men in particular.”

Member Gordon dismissed a complaint of sexual harassment made by Ms Boles towards Ms Gitau, finding she was “not sufficiently cogent or reliable” to prove the complaint’s basic facts.

A further hearing on a remedy to Mr Gitau and Ms Ng’ang’a will be held on a later date.

Mr Walsh and Ms Boles have previously been before QCAT in November 2021, where they complained about being subject to “racial discrimination or vilification” after refusing to wear masks in a clinic.

Their application to prevent their ban from the clinic was rejected by the tribunal.