To be fair, some states Retail Tenancies Act are no better.
Evicting tenants
- Thread starter niyiaw
- Start date
To be fair, some states Retail Tenancies Act are no better.
At least your tenants are paying, wait until you get a tribunal ruling stating that non paying tenants can remain in your property. It's very frustrating and I feel your pain. Once you hand over the keys of your property to a tenant, unfortunately you lose all rights to it.
Did you tell your reasons to the Tribunal? Or didn't want to bring it up?
Because in my experience, suspensions of termination orders are based on balancing the relative hardship to both landlord and tenant - so if they are banging on about moving costs and you didn't say much...
Then you really have no legs to stand on. If they've been paying the rent and looking after the property, my feelings are that you are being unreasonable by expecting them to move before their build is finished.
As Redwing said
Its a different story if YOU were also in financial difficulty & needed to live there, but you just said your reason isn't financial.
I find this view amazing. Owning a rental property is not a public service. You are not making a donation to those who cannot afford a home. Who knows the owners circumstance? Would an abusive partner be a good enough reason? Having to explain you personal life to a tribunal is not fair, you shouldn't have to justify why you need you own house back.
If you have given proper notice then they should move. I know this I not the legal view held by the tribunal but it certainly seems like the right and fair thing. I don't understand the argument against this.
Ultimately the owner is paying to own the property yet their basic contractual rights are being abused by the tenants and the tribunal.
I would be curious as to whether you mentioned your personal issues at the tribunal. It isn't fair that you have to share these details to justify your need to live in a house you own but as thatbum said earlier, the tribunal should be a balancing act.
Unfortunately it seems that many tribunal members have taken the same stance as many tenants which is 'they're a landlord, they can afford it' which may not be the case! In my opinion the laws state clearly how much notice should be provided and if you have followed the law and done the right thing then there is no reason that those laws then shouldn't be upheld at tribunal. Perhaps if the tenants had come to you earlier to negotiate staying longer as their house was still being built you could have come to some agreement with them but their actions and lack of communication does seem to me under-handed and a term I like to use, something from 'opportunistic tenants'.
Biggles - I had a case before VCAT 9 times for non-paying tenants, warrants of eviction stayed etc. etc. It got to the point that the member and I had a rather heated argument (the tenant had announced they couldn't pay the rent as the internet was disconnected and the car had been re-possessed) I pointed out (quite tactfully I thought) that it was obvious that the tenant felt total disregard toward their financial obligations as they had not even bothered to pay a simple internet bill, therefore, by evidence presented by the tenant themselves we can not be confident that rental payments will be made. I also stated that it was further proved by the fact that the past rental payments had been sporadic (at best) and had been through VCAT from their 3rd month in the property....... I got my warrant to evict but I crossed my fingers I didn't have that member listening to any of my cases for the next 6 months!!!
Unfortunately it seems that many tribunal members have taken the same stance as many tenants which is 'they're a landlord, they can afford it' which may not be the case! In my opinion the laws state clearly how much notice should be provided and if you have followed the law and done the right thing then there is no reason that those laws then shouldn't be upheld at tribunal. Perhaps if the tenants had come to you earlier to negotiate staying longer as their house was still being built you could have come to some agreement with them but their actions and lack of communication does seem to me under-handed and a term I like to use, something from 'opportunistic tenants'.
Biggles - I had a case before VCAT 9 times for non-paying tenants, warrants of eviction stayed etc. etc. It got to the point that the member and I had a rather heated argument (the tenant had announced they couldn't pay the rent as the internet was disconnected and the car had been re-possessed) I pointed out (quite tactfully I thought) that it was obvious that the tenant felt total disregard toward their financial obligations as they had not even bothered to pay a simple internet bill, therefore, by evidence presented by the tenant themselves we can not be confident that rental payments will be made. I also stated that it was further proved by the fact that the past rental payments had been sporadic (at best) and had been through VCAT from their 3rd month in the property....... I got my warrant to evict but I crossed my fingers I didn't have that member listening to any of my cases for the next 6 months!!!
