Hi Everyone,
I would love any advice on the following tenancy issue in the ACT and my understanding of the relevant rules.
In the ACT is it legal for the landlord/agent to ask a tenant to pay a $50 deposit being required by the body corporate to obtain a new key to common area facilities of the complex after a change was made outside the tenant's control? This is for a tenancy agreement that has been in place for 2 years and the body corporate have made the change, not the tenant.
At the beginning of the tenancy in early 2012, 4 weeks bond was paid and a full set of keys provided, including for the recreation area of the complex (pool, tennis court, common/function room) and the tenant has had full use of these facilities as part of their tenancy. Due to unauthorised use of the recreation area, the body corporate are changing the access control system for the recreation area meaning the old keys won't work and are requiring a $50 deposit before a new key will be issued.
The tenant does not believe they should have to pay the $50 deposit because the change was made by the body corporate/owners corporation completely out of the control of the tenant. If this deposit is not paid by someone, the tenant looses the use of facilities that are a part of the tenancy, were advertised as benefits of renting there and form part of the premium level of rent they are paying.
My research leads me to believe that the tenant can't be required to pay this deposit to get a replacement key after someone else changed the locks. As far as I am concerned, the tenant has an agreement with the landlord/agent (lessor), and the key to these areas formed part of the tenancy AND was part of the keys provided at the start, therefore the following parts of the ACT tenancy legislation apply.
Firstly, it says no payment can be required for keys other than bond or rent:
The lessor must not require any payment other than rent or bond for the following: (c) obtaining a key to the premises
In this case, the full 4 week bond has already been paid, and the legislation also says that a bond cant be more than 4 weeks:
A lessor may only require or accept as a bond an amount of not more than the first 4 weeks of rent payable under the residential tenancy agreement.
A lessor may only require or accept 1 bond in relation to a residential tenancy agreement.
Regarding changing locks:
If a lock is changed, a copy of the key to the changed lock must be provided to the other party as soon as possible.
Therefore they can't expect the tenant to pay anything additional (the max 4 weeks has been reached and the legislation says they cant require any other payment) for something which is a basic entitlement of the tenancy (keys) and the the legislation specifically says MUST be provided as soon as possible after a lock is changed.
If the landlord/agent will not provide a key in accordance with the above, then I believe the following following will apply for a rent reduction because they are loosing use of these facilities:
71 Reduction of existing rent
(1) On application by a tenant, the ACAT must order a reduction in the rental rate payable under a residential tenancy agreement if it considers that the tenant?s use or enjoyment of the premises has diminished significantly as a result of any of the following:
(a) the loss or diminished utility of an appliance, furniture, a facility or a service supplied by the lessor with the premises as a result of?
(b) the loss of the use of all or part of the premises;
I would love any advice on the following tenancy issue in the ACT and my understanding of the relevant rules.
In the ACT is it legal for the landlord/agent to ask a tenant to pay a $50 deposit being required by the body corporate to obtain a new key to common area facilities of the complex after a change was made outside the tenant's control? This is for a tenancy agreement that has been in place for 2 years and the body corporate have made the change, not the tenant.
At the beginning of the tenancy in early 2012, 4 weeks bond was paid and a full set of keys provided, including for the recreation area of the complex (pool, tennis court, common/function room) and the tenant has had full use of these facilities as part of their tenancy. Due to unauthorised use of the recreation area, the body corporate are changing the access control system for the recreation area meaning the old keys won't work and are requiring a $50 deposit before a new key will be issued.
The tenant does not believe they should have to pay the $50 deposit because the change was made by the body corporate/owners corporation completely out of the control of the tenant. If this deposit is not paid by someone, the tenant looses the use of facilities that are a part of the tenancy, were advertised as benefits of renting there and form part of the premium level of rent they are paying.
My research leads me to believe that the tenant can't be required to pay this deposit to get a replacement key after someone else changed the locks. As far as I am concerned, the tenant has an agreement with the landlord/agent (lessor), and the key to these areas formed part of the tenancy AND was part of the keys provided at the start, therefore the following parts of the ACT tenancy legislation apply.
Firstly, it says no payment can be required for keys other than bond or rent:
The lessor must not require any payment other than rent or bond for the following: (c) obtaining a key to the premises
In this case, the full 4 week bond has already been paid, and the legislation also says that a bond cant be more than 4 weeks:
A lessor may only require or accept as a bond an amount of not more than the first 4 weeks of rent payable under the residential tenancy agreement.
A lessor may only require or accept 1 bond in relation to a residential tenancy agreement.
Regarding changing locks:
If a lock is changed, a copy of the key to the changed lock must be provided to the other party as soon as possible.
Therefore they can't expect the tenant to pay anything additional (the max 4 weeks has been reached and the legislation says they cant require any other payment) for something which is a basic entitlement of the tenancy (keys) and the the legislation specifically says MUST be provided as soon as possible after a lock is changed.
If the landlord/agent will not provide a key in accordance with the above, then I believe the following following will apply for a rent reduction because they are loosing use of these facilities:
71 Reduction of existing rent
(1) On application by a tenant, the ACAT must order a reduction in the rental rate payable under a residential tenancy agreement if it considers that the tenant?s use or enjoyment of the premises has diminished significantly as a result of any of the following:
(a) the loss or diminished utility of an appliance, furniture, a facility or a service supplied by the lessor with the premises as a result of?
(b) the loss of the use of all or part of the premises;
