How do you charge for damage to a kitchen bench?

[skater]

I love to bits so I look over it like a hawk

And there's the problem. It's not your PPOR! You are too emotionally attached!

Tenants do damage! You can't claim 'new for old' on things, just repairs in most cases. Get used to it! It's not fair, but that's the way it is. And this is just the tip of the iceberg of what can, and does go wrong and you are left paying for it.

If you don't like it/can't deal with it/are too stressed over it etc, then residential real estate is probably not for you. If it were one of Dazz's big sheds, however, you can get away with charging them the earth, and more.

 

[DaveM]

Ensure you charge the tenant your hourly rate for going there to look, as well as any fuel, tolls or airfares or KFC meals

 

[Sez]

Are you saying that the cost of the repair charged by a kitchen firm to insert a panel to re-place the damaged area would be discounted by an amount (proportionally) equivalent to the depreciation of the cabinets? Can you give an example where VCAT has arrived at that decision?

It depends entirely on the age of the bench. If the bench is replaced then costs awarded against the tenant will be depreciated according to the age of the bench and the % of the bench damaged.

If the bench is original and 30 + years old then yes, it is possible that even if repaired VCAT won't award the full amount due to the age of the bench.

An example is just about every bond claim for accidental damages ever . I have been to VCAT over a property where the carpet was 3 years old. The tenants had trod dog waste through the carpet, lit a fire in the lounge room and repaired motorcycles in the back bedroom. Carpets were replaced throughout, despite the fact the carpets were in perfect condition when these tenants moved in, VCAT depreciated by 30%.

There was graffiti on the walls at the same property and VCAT awarded $200 toward the cost of re-painting the walls as the walls hadn't been painted in over 5 years. The only reason I got that much was because I convinced the member that it was malicious damage and therefore the walls in question shouldn't be depreciated.

VCAT is cruel.

 

[Dazz]

VCAT is cruel.

I'm sure if you asked every sitting tribunal member they would all say exactly the same thing "we are simply administering the RTA in a fair and just way".

It's the RTA that is cruel to one party. Trouble is, until something really bad happens, that party has no idea and continues on their merry way in blissful ignorance.

 

[crest133]

Grey area, probably not worth too much angst and get a tenant offside. Maybe convert it into a bin shute. Can you enlarge the hole to about 300mm, add SS garbage hole insert with lid which dumps into a bin in the altered cupboard underneath ?
Cheers
crest133

 

[mattysavager]

I've had success with the resurfacing companies.

I had a tenant that had burned a pot outline into a 10 year old bench top, it was a hideous pink marble-effect laminate abomination that was also my client's pride and joy. Agonisingly selected from a pile of swatches, he was very attached to it.

Knowing full well that he would likely get $150 compensation at the tribunal, I convinced the owner to get a quote to do a spray resurfacing of the laminate bench top, (around $600) and the tenant agreed to pay. 75%.

Owner got a basically new bench top for $150. Happy as Larry.