HIA Orders

I am interested in starting the process to remove the powers Housing SA have in declaring a property sub standard. How would I go about this? Maybe speak to my local MP or the housing minister. Get a petition going and go on talk back radio with my cause. Any other ideas? Is someone already trying that I can join? I have no problem with good housing. But how can a tenant agree to something that the government doesn't?
Many have been there and done that.
Never actually heard of anyone "winning" as such.
One couple I know ended up bulldozing the property and building a new one. It was cheaper than bringing it up to compliance.
There is a particular individual who knows the system very well and puts people in this situation through their thorough knowledge of the system.
Good luck!
I don't think many have been there and done that at all - I think mmgg means removing the HIA orders from being able to be applied to ANY house STATEWIDE, not just a particular house.

Right now it is just a good system for low earners to be able to **** their landlords off and get cheap rent, or is used as a revenge thing from bad tenants moving out as an expensive parting gift. I have to deal with the system of removing an order soon, except we haven't spent $20,000 treating salt damp (which basically every 110yo cottage round here has, which I guess makes all older houses substandard by definition) so we probably won't get the order off.
Order to improve. Sometimes the things you need to fix are so expensive it is easier to demolish and build new. Its a South Australian thing.

I've had two houses with a HIA order now. They don't mean anything if you live in them, they are an issue if the house is rented as SA Housing sets the amount of rent you're allowed to charge.
Order to improve. Sometimes the things you need to fix are so expensive it is easier to demolish and build new. Its a South Australian thing.

I've had two houses with a HIA order now. They don't mean anything if you live in them, they are an issue if the house is rented as SA Housing sets the amount of rent you're allowed to charge.

"WHAT THE" and folks don't buy in canberra because of the 99 year leases???
at least we can set our own rents..for now ......
Thanks for those ideas

I tend to agree that it is something that tenants have up their sleeve rather than anything else. The more I think about it the harder it is. On the one hand the house does need to be at a certain standard. The biggest problem in my house is moisture in the walls in the corner of the house where the bathroom is. This problem it seems to me is something I need to fix anyway, so I don't need an inspector on my back. The house would crumble away if I didn't fix it. So I suppose I am complaining about the attitude of the inspector. He seems to want to finger point and not advise, offer suggestions as to how to fix. This is far more helpful than by this date it will be declared sub-standard. Also by reducing rent how does that improve the standard of the house. Doesn't make sense. I would rather the government offer the services of those who can fix the house. A plumber and electrician to start. That would help the improvement of the house. I know that sounds silly but don't we want the overall problem fixed. Or fix it by this date otherwise we will fix it and charge the owner. I don't know but there has to be a better way.
Looking further afield.

Another thought. What do the other states have? Could any of them comment? If a tenant is unhappy with the standard of the house they rent from you? How do they get you the landowner to improve it?
the tennents write a letter to some board, they write one back, then they write one to you , then you write one back..............
then they reply to you , then you do as they require, then you write another back, then the tennents might have a winge, send another, you get another and the thing goes away, easy!!!!:D
thats an absoloute NO! they do not step in, what we do is our business not theirs, but saying that the homes here are not that old, anny thing thats fifty years old are now worth millions, due to their location.
I am interested in removing Housing SA's power to put HIA orders on private and commercial rental premises. While I agree that housing should be of a reasonable standard I do not believe that a tenant should be able to have a government organisation step in after they have accepted a property in what ever condition it is in and seek improvements or a rent reduction. I have recently received a notice of intent and this is a property that was painted, had new carpets and curtains installed etc before the tenants moved in. And this was done by a tenant that was more than 6 weeks behind in rent and the tribunal member saw fit to have the tenancy continue. Ironically the form 2 that becomes a termination of the rental agreement is very easily overturned by the tribunal member. You have to ask what is the point of this form if it is not enforced by the tribunal???
The worst is when they trash the house THEN seek an order.

I had the HIA guy out a few weeks ago, it looks like we can remove everything except the damp walls and cracking. The house is 110 and made with 50cm thick limestone walls with a topcoat of render on the outside - no dampcourse, no foundations and plenty of movement in a house of this age and construction - just like every single other similar house around here that does NOT have a HIA order on it.

Nothing we can do about those, so it will have a HIA order indefinitely.
Just because there is a fault in the design of your property according to the current building standard does not mean that it is actually a defect. It is a floor in the building standard of the era that the house was built in. The residential agreement states that the landlord must keep the premises in a reasonable state of repair having regard to their age, character and prospective life. (Fact Sheet 5) To expect an old house to meet current standards is not a reasonable expectation.
Tell this to the HIA guys :mad:

Which is, I assume, what you're planning to do?

If you're petitioning or something, count me in for a signature.

Edit: I'd actually have less problems with the HIA process if it applied to *all* houses and was, say, something administered at change of ownership, rather than applied at the whim of an angry tenant and ONLY by tenants who've actually heard of HIA orders. This is more in line with the 'certificate of occupancy' in other states from what I understand.
Update - our HIA order (which now ONLY lists damp and nothing else) has reduced the rent for the house down from market by $85 per week, which is insane ... right now it means no investor will buy it, as that reduces the yield something savage. The assessed rent is $50 lower than the unrenovated dump across the street.

Wish there was a way to appeal. Even an extra $30 a week would make it worth it.

I had it listed as for rent briefly at that price and people were asking if that was per room, since it is so low it can't possibly be for the whole house.
I'm a bit confused ...... you have a inspector that comes out because a tenant is not happy and the inspector says the place is substandard (whatever reason/s) and the tribunal says this is the rent that should now be paid. Kinda one sided, of course I'm not surprised in this I guess.

:eek: and I assume if you terminate the lease of the tenant, the order stays? what rent can you charge the next tenant? or is this now been set by the tribunal and the sub standard order remains in place all the time now?

What if ..... You get another tenant in place and say 12mths down the track this tenant finds out the place has an order on it will this mean if you had increased the rent above the order you would have to pay the tenant monies back?

I'd have to terminate the lease when it came up for renewal. At least that tenant is gone.

Yes to all of the above. These orders are *incredibly* hard to get off. Even if I spent a fortune putting in a silicone dampcourse in my house it would still take some years for the walls to completely dry out and I'd be stuck with the order all that time.

The rent we've been allotted is so much lower than market we're going to appeal (it is smack on market for several other towns in the area but this one town has notoriously high rents) and we also need to have the second title removed from the order.

We read the legislation and it turns out you can appeal, but they don't tell you how, its just buried in the fine print that you can do it.

Not sure I like it that I've subdivided this block but the reduced rent now applies to BOTH titles. Hopefully its easy to remove the second title, it shoudn't have been there in the first place. As it stands, if I tried to rent out both houses at once I'd be stuck with a rental amount approximately $450 a week lower than market - one of the houses is a brand new 4x2.

My opinion is these orders should be reset if a house changes hands with no lease in place (and the previous lease has ended at least 6 months ago), and then the onus be put on the new tenant to get a new order put on if the house is rented down the track. Having damp in the walls that is only able to be detected with a moisture meter shouldn't knock $85 a week off potential rent (and quite a lot off the possible sale price) and scare away every buyer out there ...

Damp is the worst one, it is the hardest to get rid of and you're virtually guaranteed to have damp in the walls in any house that is old enough to have no dampcoursing.

Edit: also, you don't even need to have a tenant on a lease to get an order on. Or a tenant that is actually paying rent. My house got a HIA order on it because a 'mate' of the owner was living there and totally trashed the place, got an order on it, left, and the owner got the house repossessed.
Sick of dodgy landlords

I signed up to this forum just so I could reply to this thread.
i am 5 months into a 12 month lease on a property. i am the first person the rent this property after it was 'renovated' (read painted). Within this time, about 3/4 of the taps leak, some leak 24/7 inside the walls (resulting in a stench of mould coming in through a wall vent in the laundry), the back fence has collapsed, and there is an electrical problem with the lights in the bathroom resulting in light globes lasting less than a week. (there is now a battery operated lamp in there). The lights in the shed are falling off the roof, the rainwater tank is more useful as a colander, and the bathroom tiles are
falling off the wall.

The land agent has been informed of this several times (using their 'official' maintenance request forms, by email, by fax, and now twice by registered post.

A fencing contractor came around to look at the fence, but that was 3 months ago and we haven't heard anything since, and no plumber or electrician has been arranged to come around.

The land agent has completely failed to uphold their responsibility to keep the property maintained.
The only real option i have left now is to get an HIA order on the property.
Stop quit whinging about having to maintain your properties, because all investments require maintaining (even shares; its just that you only see the absolute end result). if the land-agent wasn't such a dodgy bunch, I wouldn't even have to consider this option.

So in this case, it is the only way I can get anything done about this, so from my point of view, the land-agent has given me no option.
Damp is the worst one, it is the hardest to get rid of and also the most dangerous to anyone living there. It's linked to respiratory diseases , cancers etc... Get rid of it or demolish the house ,there are no shortcuts to this... easy.