This exists. the url for it is somersoft.com.
Evicting tenants
- Thread starter niyiaw
- Start date
This exists. the url for it is somersoft.com.
As already noted, the tribunal is likely to let them stay until they have finished building so the tenant has already won. Only way to get something back is to stop tribunal action and send a notice to increase the rent to an uncomfortable level. At least when they don't pay you will have the possibility of getting something out of the tribunal.
As mentioned previously, I don't subscribe to the 'clean hands' philosophy. Fight dirty with me and ill fight right back.
Problem with this approach is that by the sounds of these tenants they will apply for an investigation due to an unreasonable rent increase........ then back to tribunal we go. We have no way of knowing just how long this house will take to build and you don't want tribunal reducing the rent to even less than the original rent!
You old cynic Dazz 
Tenant not moving out at the end of the notice period is basically the same as the vendor/purchaser having to serve notice to complete a purchase. It can (and probably will) drag on.
If the tenant doesn't have a legitimate excuse to vacate, the Tribunal should find in your favour (might need to hint to the tribunal that they have their own house to move into).
Tenant not moving out at the end of the notice period is basically the same as the vendor/purchaser having to serve notice to complete a purchase. It can (and probably will) drag on.
If the tenant doesn't have a legitimate excuse to vacate, the Tribunal should find in your favour (might need to hint to the tribunal that they have their own house to move into).
I need to stop jinxing myself. Apparently it's not all about the house completion that's expected to take another 3 months. Tenants gave tribunal some sob story on financial hardship and how they couldnt afford to move and sign another lease so now they get another 2 months. WTF? It's a few hundred to hire a van to move on the weekend. Yes you front up bond for the new place but you get the amount from mine back, unless you screwed something up on my property. How can you not have 2k to move??? And why is it my goddamn fault your financial planning is a fail? I call bs... you have the damn money to move but just don't want to. Well guess who is getting their 6 month inspection next week... and boy I'm sure there'll be some nitpicking...
Sorry to hear it Niyiaw - thought it may happen but I was hoping for the best for you. Tribunal can be harsh and they basically have to decide who will suffer the worst financial hardship in these cases (the tenant or the landlord) they often decide as the landlord will still get rent the tenant will be worse off *sigh* and so order in their favor.
Remember though, take the high road. You want to be ready to have them back in tribunal the second they're supposed to be out of your property if they don't move. If you can take the moral high ground you're a step ahead already. . Keep us posted!
Remember though, take the high road. You want to be ready to have them back in tribunal the second they're supposed to be out of your property if they don't move. If you can take the moral high ground you're a step ahead already.
. Keep us posted!Sorry to hear it Niyiaw - thought it may happen but I was hoping for the best for you. Tribunal can be harsh and they basically have to decide who will suffer the worst financial hardship in these cases (the tenant or the landlord) they often decide as the landlord will still get rent the tenant will be worse off *sigh* and so order in their favor.
Remember though, take the high road. You want to be ready to have them back in tribunal the second they're supposed to be out of your property if they don't move. If you can take the moral high ground you're a step ahead already.
I wish I could put a cost value on my stress and inconvenience and send a bill to the tenants. Sometimes I hate our nanny state and the laws that cater to the dumbest common factor. Those who are responsible and can keep their crap together get to pay for the ones that aren't and can't.
I thought I don't have to go back to the tribunal. From what PM said if they aren't out by then, then here comes the sheriff. Though apparently I have to pay the 300 odd for that privilege too.
Your wish has been specifically excluded by the Tenant's Union advocate who was instrumental in drafting the legislation in the first place many moons ago. Your wish was swept off the table yonks before you ever bought a property. It's just you have recently found out about it.
...now that's encouraging. You're on the right track now !!
sorry to hear of your problems but this thread has made me laugh at several points! the sad thing is it's all so true. as for value of your time, that seems to be completely disregarded in these sorts of matters... probably because the quantum of your hourly rate against the rent you are collecting is out of whack (receive an email and reply and that'd be a weeks rent gone).
So to repost a gem of wisdom attributable to Dazz - is something to the effect of 'why do business with people that have no money?'. doesn't get much simpler than that
Can't do that either
When is their new house due to be completed...3 months
If they move now ($2k) they have to find a short term rental (possibly difficult or expensive) then move again (another $2k).
Financial hardship may be renting, plus building at the same time?
....can't do that either !!
Any vexatious report after a negative tribunal decision will just be rejected by the presiding member as petty and vengeful.
That tactic was tried by Landlord's donkeys years ago and summarily struck out of the legislation, on the recommendation of the Tenancy advocates.
Niyiaw, your troubles are not the first to beset a residential Landlord.
All of these things your are trying have been tried and failed miserably years ago. You really need to appreciate this isn't the first merry-go-round in the circus.
My only suggestion is : "Stop doing business with people who haven't the desire nor the capacity to do business with you."
Of course you can't, for the same reason you can't increase rent 100% per MRO's suggestion. Lots of landlords - sorry, landslaves - still don't get it!
You can't do anything that suggests you're trying to get around the laws. If the Tribunal's ruled they can stay, they can stay. If you try to get around it, you're just going to ensure the Tribunal goes even more pro-tenant next time.
I also think if it gets to 2 months and they need another month (or so), your PM's dreaming if they think you can get the sheriffs in at 2 months and 1 day, unless the Tribunal specifically made such an order. I'd be amazed if they weren't able to get a further extension, barring some exceptional circumstances (e.g. you proved that they aren't actually building, or that the building's finished and they could move in, etc.).
Unless your own reasons for "needing" to move in were similarly compelling, but we don't know what those reasons are yet.
It's complicted and personal and not something I really want to go into here. Unfortunately, the reason isn't financial.
That would be their problem for having no financial buffer. Yet somehow it's my problem. I'm not a charity, they can live in the gutter for all I care. They lost all sympathy from me when instead of being decent human beings and bringing this up back in April when they knew they had no itention of leaving, they've dragged it out to now and given me this crap to cop.
And given your experience in all this how do you propose to weed these people out? At this rate I may need to go win lotto and buy an island, given my faith in people has once again reached an all time low.
Sorry to hear you're having a tough time. We might sound like hardasses, it's just that unfortunately, we've seen it before. It's less that we're unsympathetic as unsurprised.
How do you know that they knew back in April that they'd need this extra time? Is it possible that the builder's always "two months from completion"? (Heard that one before, too!)niyiaw said:
I just know that I've seen heaps of situations where landlords and tenants are each convinced the other party's an a**hole, based on communications through the property manager, and when the two of them talk directly, the issue's sorted very quickly and it turns out that both parties were being entirely reasonable. Sticking a PM in the middle - even though I generally advocate it as being a very wise plan - does distort clear communication.
I've had examples on both sides, e.g. as a tenant and as a landlord, but one example springs to mind. We were renting a unit and the owner wanted to sell. The selling agent advised us they weren't planning opens, just ad hoc inspections when somebody was interested. The agent started ringing me at work about once a week, and saying "can I bring somebody over in an hour?", at which point I'd leave work, race home, tidy the house, and leave them to it. (Because I like to accommodate where I can and create goodwill, and because it was forcing me to be a bit tidier, so there was not too much to do.)
She did this about once a week or so for maybe 6 or 8 weeks, and then one day, I said "No, sorry, can't do it, have an important meeting at work and I can't get away to tidy up. Happy to do it tomorrow." (Legally, they were required to give at least 24 hrs notice anyway.)
Then nothing for a month or so, then a new selling agent rings me, tells me he's been appointed, and says "So, I hear you're averse to any inspections, but I'd really appreciate if we could negotiate something that works for both of us." I think I agreed to fortnightly opens and one ad hoc inspection per week with at least 12 hrs notice, or something like that, and it was precisely what they wanted, and more than the owners or agent dreamed they'd get. The previous agent had told the owner that I was "refusing to allow inspections", and told him I was a nightmare and that they'd never sell the place. It was sold within about 3 weeks from the new agent being appointed, from memory.
I've found that most people are reasonable most of the time. If something sounds unreasonable, it might be because they're unreasonable, but I've found that it's more frequently because somebody's talking ****.
Good luck.
