A tenant is subletting my property!-Victoria

[Peter 14.7]

Property in Brisbane was sublet by tenant to 35 (yes, 35) overseas students. Apparently bunk beds everywhere. Sub-letting tenant taken to Court by Council/Govt and fined $35K.

Probably still came out ahead.

First thing I would do is report this guy to your local Council and also the Fire Services. There are strict laws regarding backpacker accommodation in most States since the Childers fire.
Marg

And this is path to go. Provide Council with his details and get your neighbors to provide support.

Essentially what he is doing is an illegal use. IF you lease an office as and office and they open retail then that is the same. Councils are very particular about this as open slather means every second house could be a chop shop, hair dresser or brothel.

Peter 14.7

 

[mattysavager]

And this is path to go. Provide Council with his details and get your neighbors to provide support.

Essentially what he is doing is an illegal use. IF you lease an office as and office and they open retail then that is the same. Councils are very particular about this as open slather means every second house could be a chop shop, hair dresser or brothel.

Peter 14.7

I agree with you Peter, however it seems there are already grounds to evict the tenant. The Council has no power to do anything except legal action against the tenant (fines etc) and if the owner is aware of the situation, the Council could theoretically then pursue the owner with the same legal action.

I would go through the proper Property Act channels and the tribunal to evict the tenants, and then it's possible to run the house as a student accom/boarding house with council approval.

I think involving Council at this stage would just cause a mountain of unnecessary paperwork when they can be evicted already based on their illegal sub-letting.

Just my $.02

 

[Aaron_C]

FIND A PROPERTY MANAGER!!!! Before it costs you any more money.

Nah no way. Self manage is best if you have the time.

 

[krak]

Thanks for all your feedback everyone.
I spoke to consumer affairs and they have directed me down the legal path which I will pursue. However I will keep you posted,
Regards,

 

[wylie]

I'm not sure what you mean by "the legal path".

Why not follow the normal path as if he is indeed still living there. He is your only tenant. He may not be there any more, but you must send forms in the right order, at the right time and evict him as soon as you possibly can.

I'm in Queensland, and maybe things are different in Victoria, but once he is evicted, you should be able to go around and change the locks.

As I said, I'm not sure of the laws in Victoria, but you need to do this properly as if he is living there and you are evicting "him". If his backpacker "clients" don't move then I would guess the police would "move them on"... wouldn't they?

I know that a few years ago when we had a tenant stop paying rent, we had to wait until midnight of the day they had to move. Local cops were happy to come with me the next morning and move them on if they hadn't moved the day before. I saw them leaving the day before, so didn't take the cops with me. I took a locksmith and changed the locks. RTA told me later that morning that because the keys hadn't been handed back, technically the house was not yet "mine". No way was I getting the keys back from this wacko tenant, so too bad, so sad, too late... the house was mine again.

 

[jaycee]

I'm not sure what you mean by "the legal path".

Why not follow the normal path as if he is indeed still living there. He is your only tenant. He may not be there any more, but you must send forms in the right order, at the right time and evict him as soon as you possibly can.

I'm in Queensland, and maybe things are different in Victoria, but once he is evicted, you should be able to go around and change the locks.

As I said, I'm not sure of the laws in Victoria, but you need to do this properly as if he is living there and you are evicting "him". If his backpacker "clients" don't move then I would guess the police would "move them on"... wouldn't they?

I know that a few years ago when we had a tenant stop paying rent, we had to wait until midnight of the day they had to move. Local cops were happy to come with me the next morning and move them on if they hadn't moved the day before. I saw them leaving the day before, so didn't take the cops with me. I took a locksmith and changed the locks. RTA told me later that morning that because the keys hadn't been handed back, technically the house was not yet "mine". No way was I getting the keys back from this wacko tenant, so too bad, so sad, too late... the house was mine again.

Yeah, the tenant has taken the eviction notice seriously enough to move all his stuff out and not hang around, but he might not have actually moved out Despite the fact that if he was still there with the keys, you were within your rights to have the cops move him out

logic at it's best

 

[wylie]

Jaycee, the handing back of the keys is the "trigger" if you want to call it that, the acknowledgement by the tenant and the landlord that he has handed the house back to me. If he doesn't hand back the keys, even after having moved out, technically the house is not mine and I shouldn't have changed the locks.

The police were quite happy to turf him out if I hadn't called them through the day and told them that I didn't require them at 7.30 the next morning.

Just because one don't agree with the rules doesn't mean they don't have to be followed. If he had known his rights, I could have been in trouble for changing the locks. Stupid rule I know... but that's the way it goes.

 

[jaycee]

Jaycee, the handing back of the keys is the "trigger" if you want to call it that, the acknowledgement by the tenant and the landlord that he has handed the house back to me. If he doesn't hand back the keys, even after having moved out, technically the house is not mine and I shouldn't have changed the locks.

The police were quite happy to turf him out if I hadn't called them through the day and told them that I didn't require them at 7.30 the next morning.

Just because one don't agree with the rules doesn't mean they don't have to be followed. If he had known his rights, I could have been in trouble for changing the locks. Stupid rule I know... but that's the way it goes.

I was "just saying".....

Perhaps the RTA "rule makers" imagine that in situations where evicted, they would be happy to meet you for a farewell hug and sendoff

 

[wylie]

I was "just saying".....

Perhaps the RTA "rule makers" imagine that in situations where evicted, they would be happy to meet you for a farewell hug and sendoff

LOL

You wouldn't have wanted to hug this guy. He thought there were little worms in the water supply. We even got the water authority out to test it .

When we knocked on the door, he opened it, said hello to me, hubby, water tester chap, turned around and deliberately banged his head on the VJ wall behind him. Muttered something about things in his head.

We though "OK not quite the full packet". Drugs will do that to you .

Still tested the water just to make sure though... nope... must be the drugs.

 

[Deltaberry]

You need to read your tenancy act.
Follow the rules.
If you don't understand something, I'm sure there is a contact phone number for assisstance.

The tenant obviously hasn't read it and seems to be making a bucket load by not reading it.

 

[kathryn d]

The tenant obviously hasn't read it and seems to be making a bucket load by not reading it.

If the backpackers decide to take this 'tenant landlord' to tribunal, he may be in a lot of trouble.
If the 'tenant landlord' has taken a bond, and filed it..or if he is evicted, and the backpackers have paid several weeks in advance.

Lots of issues.
Tenant landlord I would assume has the same obligations, as any other landlord, in this instance.

The owner may even assist the backpackers with information on tracking down the tenant landlord for tribunal.

I doubt the owner has any legal obligation to the backpackers.

 

[Deltaberry]

I'd suspect the landlord still has obligations to the backpackers, as a previous poster alluded to. For example, tort law relationships may still apply between the two. So if a tile fell from the ceiling and smashed the backpackers on the head, I'd suspect the landlord could be liable.

Re tenant - well it sounds like they're a bunch of kids and when they run away the tribunal won't even find them. Won't even know where their new address is...

 

[krak]

Hi Guys,
The eviction notice was sent via registered post.The tenant also sent me an SMS acknowledging that he had sent received the eviction notice.

 

[alplant]

That's interesting about handing back the keys being a sort of trigger. We noticed that with our recently evicted tenants. When we rang the PM to see why they were still there the day after they were supposed to be gone her response was that she was waiting for them to hand in the keys.