- This topic has 4 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 11 months ago by .
-
Topic
-
The NSW government is to introduce a suite of measures to make life better for tenants, who comprise more than half of the residents of strata in the
[See the full post at: Pets and fee-free rents in tenancy law reforms]If you want to be alerted when anyone replies to your posts or responds to this topic, please register and login, then you will be able to subscribe to the topic. The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers. NB: Longer threads may spill over to additional pages - look for the numbers on the bottom right, under the last post.
-
Replies
-
I’ve listened to your podcast and I know how much you advocate for pet owners. Unfortunately, I had a very bad experience with a yapping dog. The dog did not stop yapping until the resident returned home. The dog could be yapping all day and into the night. Neighbours from the same strata plan and neighbouring addresses complained about it. They called the police, local council and RSPCA. They were told to “talk to strata”.
Talking to the tenant was pointless. They straight up denied the existence of a dog. Then they said the non-existent dog belonged to a relative.
In the end, the property owner evicted the tenant for keeping a pet without seeking permission. (There were other issues: illicit drug use, property damage.) It was faster to get the problem resolved with an eviction.
If it was left to “strata”, we would issue the breach of by-law notice, apply for mediation and go to NCAT. There would have been months of relentless dog yapping.
fee-free rental payments: totally agree. It is obscene that anyone would consider charging a transaction fee for paying rent.
Paying for your own background check does not seem right. They’re exploiting tenants because tenants don’t have a lot of choice right now.
The rent check idea was no doubt written without consulting an alert landlord. The premise on which it is founded is that tenants will use the data from bonds held by FT to ascertain the true rents paid by tenants rather than look at the advertised rents which it is implied may be misleading. The government also thinks landlords will use it to determine what rents they should charge.
But the premise is flawed. If a landlord has a long standing tenant say 10 years on a yearly lease that was renewed annually with rental adjustments, putting current rent, say for argument’s sake, double what it was 10 yrs ago, the bond data will reveal ONLY the rent charged in the tenant’s first year some 10 years ago because FT informs that the quantum of the bond cannot be changed until there is a change of tenant.
That will serve to only MISINFORM both landlords and tenants.
But the premise is flawed. If a landlord has a long standing tenant say 10 years on a yearly lease that was renewed annually with rental adjustments, putting current rent, say for argument’s sake, double what it was 10 yrs ago, the bond data will reveal ONLY the rent charged in the tenant’s first year some 10 years ago because FT informs that the quantum of the bond cannot be changed until there is a change of tenant.
Fortunately, the NSW Rent Check system will take into accuont the past THREE months’ rental data for each poastcode. The Rent Check system is now up and running. There is a common questions section which addresses this issue.