How does it work?

[kathryn d]

I know you are not an "American" and agree that there is a big difference.
I would never call anyone an "American" god forbid

What I did say is you are from Nth America, which last time I checked encompasses Canada no?

Yes, North America does include USA..Canada and Mexico.
We are not all "sue happy" like the States.

 

[kathryn d]

It's bloody common sense...

I open shop. customers come in, some buy, some jsut look... It costs me money to keep it en all day....and 90 of custoemrs don;t want to buy anything bloody *******s....

Hello, it's the name of the bloody game !

Those in business are always challenged by their customers. Competition in business allows people to have choice and therefore challenge/ask/move on when they feel the offer is not good...

It just sounds like normal life to me,

To me I think it has HEAPS to do with the cost.. If a door has a sh 1t / broken lock and for the same price you can get a credible lock whic will also keep the tenant happy, I see no reason not to do it except spite, what other reason or point could there be ? (I don't see the point of witholding reust just due to spite in a business relationship, it seems a bit immature and unprofessional etc I guess).

You are correct.
If the doors cannot be secured now, the LL does need to fix that. Deciding on what type of lock is the LLs choice, if it doesn't specifically say deadbolt in the ACT.

What you "think" a LL should do, doesn't matter. What is he required to do.
Generally a LL will install the lock that will last the longest, for the most economical price. THAT is good business sense.

You might think complying to a tenant's every whim is fine, and that's your choice.

Unfortuneatley, the business of owning an IP is a bit different than most other businesses. Here, the customers are permitted to steal and damage your property and you are not permitted to do anything about it...without asking permission first.

 

[morg]

It's bloody common sense...

To me I think it has HEAPS to do with the cost.. If a door has a sh 1t / broken lock and for the same price you can get a credible lock whic will also keep the tenant happy

Playing Devil's Advocate here.
What if the existing lock is perfectly functional, but isn't a "deadlock"?
This is the situation I've been in several times.
One solution I've used was to go halves in the cost, with the lock remaining after the tenants have vacated. Perfectly functional lock already present, so I saw it as an optional upgrade. Tenants thought otherwise so a compromise was reached. Everyone happy.

I've also had the same request for deadlocks, when I've known full well that they are already present at that property. Go figure.

For me,the argument against spending this seemingly small amount is that across my portfolio if I was to go ahead with all these optional extras and upgrade requests, I would be out of pocket thousands.
I'm not a big player. I hold 4 IPs. I have found that these "little" requests for optional things never end. I consider myself a reasonable person and do give some thought to the various requests, but usually deny them as I see no value in it for me.
Fair maintenance requests, on the otherhand, I have no problem with.

The old "but it's a tax deduction" drivel really is rediculous, but good luck with your investment journey all the same.

 

[kathryn d]

morg,
Spoken by a reasonable LL !!

 

[morg]

As mentioned, I think so.

 

[Monopoly]

For me,the argument against spending this seemingly small amount is that across my portfolio if I was to go ahead with all these optional extras and upgrade requests, I would be out of pocket thousands.
I'm not a big player. I hold 4 IPs. I have found that these "little" requests for optional things never end. I consider myself a reasonable person and do give some thought to the various requests, but usually deny them as I see no value in it for me.
Fair maintenance requests, on the otherhand, I have no problem with.

And in my case it would be tens of thousands!! If I had to accommodate ALL the petty little requests by tenants, I may as well (as they say) "give up the ghost" because I would be forever changing SOMETHING!! Just as there is no need to fix something if it ain't broke, there's no need to replace it. That is, if it's workin' it's stayin' and if you don't like it....leave!!!

Safety is another issue; I would never compromise a tenant's safety in any of my properties AND of course I will fix what I can or hire someone to fix what I can't, but I'll be damned if I'm going to replace something just because a tenant feels I should!!

 

[Ace in the Hole]

Just to clarify, I was not the OP, but tagged onto this thread as it was already existing and relevant to my situation.

The property in question is brand new.
Has a perfectly good, secure and working lock on the door handle, although it does not have a separate deadlock installed.
If the door were to be kicked in, a deadlock would not offer much extra resistance at all.

A couple of weeks after moving in, tenants requested a security door and deadlock to be installed.
They were told it would be at their cost.
Then they came back saying we have to install a deadlock as their insurer requires one and if we don't, they will take it to tribunal.

I called a couple of insurance companies and both would insure without a deadlock.
So, offered to pay half the costs to install a deadlock.
This was all going through the managing agent
The tenant cam back with "Don't worry about it, they will install the deadlock and claim back costs through tribunal".

To save the hassle, I decided to get the lock installed, although I'm not happy with their pushy attitude.
I don't believe I have to provide the deadlock in this case.

I figure I can get it back with a rent increase when available....

 

[DaveM]

A couple of weeks after moving in, tenants requested a security door and deadlock to be installed.
They were told it would be at their cost.
Then they came back saying we have to install a deadlock as their insurer requires one and if we don't, they will take it to tribunal.

The tenant cam back with "Don't worry about it, they will install the deadlock and claim back costs through tribunal".

To save the hassle, I decided to get the lock installed, although I'm not happy with their pushy attitude.
I don't believe I have to provide the deadlock in this case.

I would have told them to get stuffed. There is nothing in the RTA2010 that requires you to install deadlocks or window locks.

If the tenant wishes to add to the security of the property over and above what is required under the act, then it is at their cost and they must also requst permission (which you cannot reasonably withhold).

Residential Tenancies Act 2010 No 42
Current version for 1 February 2011 to date (accessed 25 April 2011 at 17:23)
Part 3Division 7Section 70

<< page >>

70 Locks and other security devices

(1) A landlord must provide and maintain the locks or other security devices necessary to ensure that the residential premises are reasonably secure.

(2) A landlord or landlord’s agent must give to each tenant named in the residential tenancy agreement a copy of the key or any other opening device or information required to open a lock or security device for the residential premises or common property to which the tenant is entitled to have access.

(3) The initial copies are to be provided free of charge but the landlord may recover from a tenant the cost of providing replacement or additional copies.

(4) This section is a term of every residential tenancy agreement.

Minor alterations

The law does not define what is a change of a ‘minor nature’. This will depend on the property and the circumstances. It is for you and the tenant to agree on or for the Tribunal to resolve if a dispute arises.

Examples of some common types of requests you may think are reasonable include:

* installing extra window safety devices for small children
* installing additional security features above what is required
* having a phone line connected
* connecting to the National Broadband Network
* putting a reasonable number of picture hooks in the wall
* planting some vegetables or flowers in the garden
* connecting to Foxtel
* replacing the toilet seat
* installing a grab rail in the shower for elderly or disabled occupants.

Compensating the tenant

Generally, an added fixture or change made by the tenant is at their expense, unless you agree otherwise. For example, you may offer to cover the cost of the materials or give a rent reduction if you let them paint the premises. It is entirely up to you. The tenant cannot go to the Tribunal seeking to get money back for improvements they make.

 

[kathryn d]

Monopoly,
This type of attitude is what separates many a property from CF- to CF+.
We also fix anything that is not safe.

Ace in the Hole,
Your heart might be in the right place, but your tenants intimidated you, and you buckled. Your property will not gain any extra rent by having a deadbolt (IMO). You have needlessly paid for this, when your tenants could have. How long before their next request?

DaveMSydney,
It's good you showed the relevant evidence. Maybe someone will take notice in the future, and stop wasting money.

No one says you need to be rude to a tenant when they request these things. Just need to explain they are welcome to do it, at their expense, but the locks stay when they leave.

 

[Monopoly]

Monopoly,
This type of attitude is what separates many a property from CF- to CF+.

Not sure I know how to take that comment.

I'm assuming you think I am being a tad harsh by saying if they (the tenants) don't like something, they can leave?

That's fine; you're more than entitled to your opinion, I can appreciate that.

As you can probably appreciate that personally (and I'm speaking ONLY for myself here) I don't care, though maybe I would (care) IF my portfolio was so heavily reliant on tenants keeping me in the black, but thankfully it's not hence I can afford to not give a rats if they stay or go!

By the way, I agree wholeheartedly, there is no need to be rude to a tenant if they make a request; I never am.

 

[Ace in the Hole]

Ace in the Hole,
Your heart might be in the right place, but your tenants intimidated you, and you buckled. Your property will not gain any extra rent by having a deadbolt (IMO). You have needlessly paid for this, when your tenants could have. How long before their next request?

I wouldn't say I buckled, I made a calculated play.
I'm just letting them get comfortable, then I'll raise them when the time is right, once they are committed.

If it went to tribunal, even though I win, I still lose in the end.

 

[kathryn d]

Not sure I know how to take that comment.

I'm assuming you think I am being a tad harsh by saying if they (the tenants) don't like something, they can leave?

That's fine; you're more than entitled to your opinion, I can appreciate that.

As you can probably appreciate that personally (and I'm speaking ONLY for myself here) I don't care, though maybe I would (care) IF my portfolio was so heavily reliant on tenants keeping me in the black, but thankfully it's not hence I can afford to not give a rats if they stay or go!

By the way, I agree wholeheartedly, there is no need to be rude to a tenant if they make a request; I never am.

Given our history of disagreeing at times , I can now see how you may think otherwise, but I was actually in complete agreement with you. You said exactly, what we we do ourselves.


Ace in the Hole,
I would agree, if you put their rent up slightly more than you would for anyone else.
Good luck anyways

 

[Monopoly]

Given our history of disagreeing at times , I can now see how you may think otherwise, but I was actually in complete agreement with you. You said exactly, what we we do ourselves.

Thanks for that. Yes our history did play a part in confusing how I read your message but more than that was my understanding of your LL style (if you will); information I've gathered from your postings over the years lead me to believe that you were (also like myself) unlikely to cater to tenants every whim.

Not that I'm suggesting (to anyone) that they should do likewise, but rather to do what is expected by the RTA 1997 Act (2010 in NSW) as a LL and anything beyond that, to politely inform their tenants that they are free to install X,Y or Z at their own expense. If of course they object to this arrangement, then it's not wrong to remind them that you as the LL are not under any legal obligation to provide it, however if you agree to do so, the cost will be born by them by way on a rental increase. That's if you're being nice, if you're not, then you can (and only after repeated requests!) remind them of their right to hand you their notice and thereby terminate their tenancy!!

 

[kathryn d]

Thanks for that. Yes our history did play a part in confusing how I read your message but more than that was my understanding of your LL style (if you will); information I've gathered from your postings over the years lead me to believe that you were (also like myself) unlikely to cater to tenants every whim.

Not that I'm suggesting (to anyone) that they should do likewise, but rather to do what is expected by the RTA 1997 Act (2010 in NSW) as a LL and anything beyond that, to politely inform their tenants that they are free to install X,Y or Z at their own expense. If of course they object to this arrangement, then it's not wrong to remind them that you as the LL are not under any legal obligation to provide it, however if you agree to do so, the cost will be born by them by way on a rental increase. That's if you're being nice, if you're not, then you can (and only after repeated requests!) remind them of their right to hand you their notice and thereby terminate their tenancy!!

Good to know we can agree sometimes and we have a very simialar style when dealing with tenants.

Our tenants wouldn't even have the right to terminate their lease. Most are on a Fixed Term Lease, and here, it means exactly that. There is no provision for a tenant to break a lease, ..unless they die. We can terminate theirs under many sections, if we wish. However, I do understand your point.

 

[_Kaos_]

Ace a wise decision based on the circumstances and nature of the request. It sounds like you will make your money back anyway and hopefully the tenant appreciates it and looks after your investment that little bit more. If it were multiple requests for silly things obviously it would be a different story. Good luck for the future.

 

[Sez]

Tenants that ask for things like these are bad tenants.

Do ONLY what you need to do. Get rid of them at the end of the lease (even if you never hear a peep from them after you've fulfilled their requests). You can be guaranteed you will hear complaints from them if they find someone else to complain about.

As a tenant and property owner, the only things I've made a fuss about as a tenant when moving in was the details on the condition report. Just pointed out things that were damaged so I wouldnt be hit up for costs later. I didnt actually request that they be fixed.

I have to disagree that tenants who ask for things are bad! I am a PM in VIC and unfortunately the landlord is responsible for most of these things. All doors have to have working locks too, this is a safety and security issue. Doesn't mean you have to install dead locks, as long as the locks that are on are functioning.

As for the connections to the house, the landlord is responsible for the cost of initial set up so that connections can be made, the tenant is responsible for their own personal account connection costs and usage costs.

Have a handyman attend or get your PM to send a handyman to quote on the windows and locks, it will be FAR cheaper than a locksmith!

 

[kathryn d]

Having just arrived back in Canada last week, we started dealing with our tenants personally. Our superintendants had been doing it for the past 8 months. This one particular tenant moved into one of our properties at Xmas time. So we hadn't met her before.

She was about 5 weeks late on rent, which is Fixed Term. She pays,but not on time, and always with the promise of this is my last time of being late.

I called her up and told her when I would be there to pick up the rent. She said she wouldn't have it all,but will have $400 of the $1320 owed.
We arrive and she greets me at the door. The first thing I do is hand her the "notice to quit". A stunned, shocked look on her face. I immediately inform her, this is what we do to protect ourselves. She pays her rent within the 15 days, and she can stay. We are to return in 14 days for the remainder.
She actually only had $300...we will see what happens next week.

She then asks for new screen mesh to be installed. I looked her straight in the eye and said no. She had rented it this way, and all tenants rip it out.I mentioned she can if she wants to.


Yesterday, we started looking for another tenant who abandoned a house in the middle of winter without notice or paying rent.
I was able to get her phone number but didn't know where she lived. I pretended she had won second prise in a local contest, and needed her address where to send the registered mail with her $5k cheque in it.
She happily told me where she lives.

 

[Perp]

I was able to get her phone number but didn't know where she lived. I pretended she had won second prise in a local contest, and needed her address where to send the registered mail with her $5k cheque in it.
She happily told me where she lives.

You'd better think of a good story for explaining to the tenant how you got their address. Tell them this story and you've admitted all the elements of the crime of fraud, under Canadian Criminal Code 380(1), maximum penalty 2 years in prison (provided the value is < $5K).

The fact that you were seeking to "right a wrong" (ie pursue a debt) doesn't work as a defence.

 

[kathryn d]

You'd better think of a good story for explaining to the tenant how you got their address. Tell them this story and you've admitted all the elements of the crime of fraud, under Canadian Criminal Code 380(1), maximum penalty 2 years in prison (provided the value is < $5K).

The fact that you were seeking to "right a wrong" (ie pursue a debt) doesn't work as a defence.

I'm not worried

 

[Lbrus]

Hello Guys, Thanks for sharing your ideas. A few of these windows have been painted shut, how would I find somone who can open these so locks can be put on?