In defence of tenants

[RumpledElf]

Heh, I was thinking more like some European countries, where they seem to have a very different system ... much, much longer leases, BYO kitchen and appliances, and the tenant can renovate - but the landlord has far less rights than here.

By the third time of being kicked out of a house within the first year of a lease because the landlord wants to sell, and real estate agents turning up at all times of day with no warning with 20 potential buyers, it does start to wear a bit thin and you wish you could stay in a house for, oh, 2 or 3 years in peace and serenity.

At one point there seemed a fairly decent number of people on here were renting a house out for less than a year, "moving in" for 6 months to get the FHOG and then renting it out again or selling, all while staying at home with their parents and never having been renters themselves, so blissfully ignorant of any impact on their tenants. Hopefully capital gains continue being negative and more people rent houses out as a longterm investment not just as a short term way to offset the bills and get a bit of tax back while waiting for the house to appreciate enough to sell.

 

[porp_e]

I can honestly say that in the 10 years I have been a tenant I've never thought of any of the rentals I have lived in as 'my house', I've always seen it as someone else's property and I honestly don't understand tenants asking for improvements like a dishwashers, air con etc when they have agreed to rent the property without those things in the first place. Maybe I'm being naive (or should have been asking for those things! )

When landlords won't make necessary repairs however, well that really gets my goat!

 

[bradcon]

The very interesting debate over 'do i treat it like my house or not'.

I tend to treat the rentals i have been in as my house because i feel like i would treat it better if i think of it as mine rather than someone elses. Sure i dont paint the place or add a second story but i still treat it like my house within reason.

Think of it like this. When you get a rental car what do most people do? Drive rougher than their own car. Perhaps thats part of the problem. If you dont know the owner of the house they become more of a 'mythical' presense and it becomes the 'us vs them' mentality. Perhaps if renters knew who they were renting from they might see that alot of investors are simply 'mum and dad' investors looking for a better retirement rather than a 'multi-millionaire fat cat' trying to suck every last cent out.

I have always believed that the adversarial nature of renters vs landlords means forums like this will always have plenty of fodder. It would be great if there was a way out of this situation but i dont think anything will change anytime soon.

 

[BayView]

I have just read quite a few negative pint of views of tenants.

We are property investors, not tenants. However I see tenants point of view.

Often the place that tenants live in is there home. (Our tenants has been living in the place we own for 5 years and we have only owned it for a bit over 2).

How would you like to be told to move out of your home in 60 days? Of course the tenant is going to be pissed off. You as the landlord may say many things (IE. I want to move in to the place) but that doesn't change the fact that if you kick your tenant out, you are kicking them out of there home.

Of course if tenants aren't paying rent on time they should be kicked out. But if they are generally good tenants, why shouldn't the tenant be peeved about being kicked out. I know I would be if someone tryed to kick me out of my home.

I think you'll find that most of the criticism of tenants here relates to their bad treatment of the property and non-adherance to their responsibilites as a tenant, and their general attitude towards us greedy landlords.

I can't remember anyone criticising tenants for being peeved off about having to move out. All tenants would be feeling this way.

On the flip side; we are selling 3 IP's at the moment, and we have managed to sell one (yesterday) with the tenant being able to stay on after settlement. So it's not always bad news for the tenant.

 

[pickle pickle]

I think you'll find that most of the criticism of tenants here relates to their bad treatment of the property and non-adherance to their responsibilites as a tenant, and their general attitude towards us greedy landlords.

I can't remember anyone criticising tenants for being peeved off about having to move out. All tenants would be feeling this way.

On the flip side; we are selling 3 IP's at the moment, and we have managed to sell one (yesterday) with the tenant being able to stay on after settlement. So it's not always bad news for the tenant.

Read the thread titled "Aren't tenants funny." I started this thread after reading that thread.

 

[Dazz]

I have always believed that the adversarial nature of renters vs landlords means forums like this will always have plenty of fodder.

The adversarial nature of any Contract between two parties is the very fundamental basis of our system of law.


The two parties put down who they are, they state what the terms of the agreement is, it states what both the rights and responsibilities of both parties are....and away we go.


As long as both parties abide by their obligations as stated in the Contract, no-one ever gets in a huff, no-one ever needs to get the agreement out and no-one ever needs to have a ding dong where lawyers get involved.


It's only when one party decides to cut corners, skimp a little, not do what they agreed to do, not 'not do' what they agreed they wouldn't....that the Contract comes out and the lawyers start arguing amongst themselves. Six years later the recalcitrant party finally gets dragged kicking and screaming along in a direction they desparately don't wont to go down.


Most of the time, most people are honourable and do exactly what they said they would. Leases and contracts are only there for the "what if" scenarios when one party decides to play silly buggers and deviate from their responsibilities.


Of course, in my experience, what I've found is that most people don't thoroughly read the agreement in the first place, and hence neither know their rights nor responsibilities.....and start making it up as they go along or start assuming things based on what was said prior, rather than what is actually written down and what they signed up for. This is where is really goes to custard.


That goes for property investors when signing up for mortgages. That goes for Tenants signing up to Leases. It goes for hirers signing up to hire a piece of equipment. It's always the party that DIDN'T write the contract that seems to struggle with it, as the other party usually does their utmost to cover their behind.....and as we all know, in a Contract when there are only two parties, when one party is "just covering themselves" they are, by definition, exposing the other party to the risk.

It would be great if there was a way out of this situation but i dont think anything will change anytime soon.

You would need to change the very essence of our system of law, and I'd hazard a guess there would be quite a gaggle of wigged lawyers and judges not too happy at you trying to unseat them from their very feathery comfortable nests.

 

[jaycee]

Read the thread titled "Aren't tenants funny." I started this thread after reading that thread.

Sheesh of scourse we've done it here...

We're humans, this is what humans do...

Even if they are better than 95% + of the population who will never own an invesmtent porpeorty (which is written in every religion's gospel as the
pinnacle of human accomplishment)

We wish we didn't but I would be lying if I haven't seen it with my very own eyes...

 

[bradcon]

The adversarial nature of any Contract between two parties is the very fundamental basis of our system of law.


The two parties put down who they are, they state what the terms of the agreement is, it states what both the rights and responsibilities of both parties are....and away we go.


As long as both parties abide by their obligations as stated in the Contract, no-one ever gets in a huff, no-one ever needs to get the agreement out and no-one ever needs to have a ding dong where lawyers get involved.


It's only when one party decides to cut corners, skimp a little, not do what they agreed to do, not 'not do' what they agreed they wouldn't....that the Contract comes out and the lawyers start arguing amongst themselves. Six years later the recalcitrant party finally gets dragged kicking and screaming along in a direction they desparately don't wont to go down.


Most of the time, most people are honourable and do exactly what they said they would. Leases and contracts are only there for the "what if" scenarios when one party decides to play silly buggers and deviate from their responsibilities.


Of course, in my experience, what I've found is that most people don't thoroughly read the agreement in the first place, and hence neither know their rights nor responsibilities.....and start making it up as they go along or start assuming things based on what was said prior, rather than what is actually written down and what they signed up for. This is where is really goes to custard.


That goes for property investors when signing up for mortgages. That goes for Tenants signing up to Leases. It goes for hirers signing up to hire a piece of equipment. It's always the party that DIDN'T write the contract that seems to struggle with it, as the other party usually does their utmost to cover their behind.....and as we all know, in a Contract when there are only two parties, when one party is "just covering themselves" they are, by definition, exposing the other party to the risk.






You would need to change the very essence of our system of law, and I'd hazard a guess there would be quite a gaggle of wigged lawyers and judges not too happy at you trying to unseat them from their very feathery comfortable nests.

While i agree with what you say i am suggesting the 'nature' is adversarial, in that LL's seem to think that the Tenant is up to no good, and the Tenant thinks that the LL will take them to the cleaners at the first opportuity. There is no co-operation, no mutual respect, nothing.

While i get that we as tenants are lucky enough to have a roof over our heads provided by a LLs, the LL needs to also understand that without tenants they woudl have very expensive properties sitting there doing, well not much.

In my limited experience when the LL and I communicated without the REA things got done quickly and there were never any issues. Once the REA became involved the communication broke down and everything became a Sh$%fight.

We can all agree (i think) that the REA is also a issue here but as long as they get paid poorly you cant expect the standard to change. School teachers are another area where you get what you pay for. Pay peanuts, get monkeys.

There obviously needs to be a legal framework (and i for one feel that the LL needs more rights as they do own the house and land) but the nature of the relationship (where possible) needs to change.

It wont change, so its a moot point anyways.

 

[wylie]

As Dazz has often said, cutting out the middle man in many situations and dealing directly between the two parties can mean smoother sailing.

I have self-managed for over 30 years and rarely had an issue. I respect my tenants (apart from the very few who have caused me angst) and they respect me.

Tenant/landlord is certainly one area where a middleman (PM) can cause issues. Many would not want to be without a PM, but I like dealing directly with my tenants. There are never any misunderstandings. I get the story from the horses mouth and the tenant gets immediate answers and/or action.

I have just heard the landlords' story about a house in our street where the PM has caused such a stink that everything is soured. PM is very much on the side of the outgoing tenant so the poor landlords have no chance of pursuing the reimbursement from the bond that they believe they are owed.

I'd rather manage the tenant personally than have the silly game of "chinese whispers" that seems to be the "norm" in a lot of situations where things are going wrong.

 

[kathryn d]

Well said, Dazz

 

[jaycee]

As Dazz has often said, cutting out the middle man in many situations and dealing directly between the two parties can mean smoother sailing.

I have self-managed for over 30 years and rarely had an issue. I respect my tenants (apart from the very few who have caused me angst) and they respect me.

Tenant/landlord is certainly one area where a middleman (PM) can cause issues. Many would not want to be without a PM, but I like dealing directly with my tenants. There are never any misunderstandings. I get the story from the horses mouth and the tenant gets immediate answers and/or action.

I have just heard the landlords' story about a house in our street where the PM has caused such a stink that everything is soured. PM is very much on the side of the outgoing tenant so the poor landlords have no chance of pursuing the reimbursement from the bond that they believe they are owed.

I'd rather manage the tenant personally than have the silly game of "chinese whispers" that seems to be the "norm" in a lot of situations where things are going wrong.

That bit takeas a bit of guts, harder work and an acceptance of this responsibility being yours. From some of the complaints against tenatns, it seems not all landlords are as willing to take this responsiblity as others, hence use PM's to not have to deal with it....

 

[wylie]

That bit takeas a bit of guts, harder work and an acceptance of this responsibility being yours. From some of the complaints against tenatns, it seems not all landlords are as willing to take this responsiblity as others, hence use PM's to not have to deal with it....

Totally agree with this, but it suits me, I have the time and patience and I like knowing what is going on. I understand others do not wish to have anything to do with their tenants.

It all comes down to what suits everybody individually.

 

[BayView]

Read the thread titled "Aren't tenants funny." I started this thread after reading that thread.

aah yes! I revisited that thread and realised what the first post was all about.

It is unfortunate that the tenants have to move, but that's part of the deal with renting.

We are renting ourselves at the moment, and it would not be nice to have to pack up and move if we weren't planning to move in the short term, but if it happens you deal with it and move on (sorry for the pun ).

Demanding that the PM should find them an almost identical place to live with views etc is a bit childish.

Dare I say it - sooky lala victim mentality?

Let's not forget the flipside - if the tenant really wants to leave and break their lease and not pay any rent until the next tenant moves in (as they should be doing) there isn't much the LL can do about it.

And; it's happened to us twice. Never saw a cent of the money.

 

[skater]

aah yes! I revisited that thread and realised what the first post was all about.

It is unfortunate that the tenants have to move, but that's part of the deal with renting.

.

Yes, as I recall the Landlord wanted to move back to their PPOR, which is their right to do so. If the tenant wants security of tenure, then they are always free to purchase a property themselves.

 

[jaycee]

Totally agree with this, but it suits me, I have the time and patience and I like knowing what is going on. I understand others do not wish to have anything to do with their tenants.

It all comes down to what suits everybody individually.

I amn suggesting in my post more thant some don't want to be mature and gutsy enough to deal with it like oyu do. So they hand it over naively to a PM and hope that everything will go perfect and problems won't exist !!!!!

I manage my 3 as well.

Some of us dont want to be landlords, we jsut the rent money without dealing the custoers

It's funny, it's as if soem aare tryign to PROVE tenans are worse people landlords or something.

 

[newbyinvestor]

I amn suggesting in my post more thant some don't want to be mature and gutsy enough to deal with it like oyu do. So they hand it over naively to a PM and hope that everything will go perfect and problems won't exist !!!!!

I manage my 3 as well.

Some of us dont want to be landlords, we jsut the rent money without dealing the custoers

It's funny, it's as if soem aare tryign to PROVE tenans are worse people landlords or something.

No some of us work 60 hours a week, have families to look after and simply put investment properties in the hands of Property Managers because they are allegedly the Proffessionals and know what they are doing.
Don't they?

 

[jaycee]

No some of us work 60 hours a week, have families to look after and simply put investment properties in the hands of Property Managers because they are allegedly the Proffessionals and know what they are doing.
Don't they?

I wasn't referring to why some investors use propeorty mangers.

I was suggesting how some investors appear who want to invest in poreprty without accepting they are becoming landlords and will one day ahve to deal with people issues and the associated problems etc.

I believe a PM should know what they are doing etc... I can't tell if they all know what they are doing or not, you probably have more experience than I do with them by the sounds of it.

 

[BayView]

It's funny, it's as if soem aare tryign to PROVE tenans are worse people landlords or something.

JC, none of us are here to prove tenants are worse people than us.

We merely discuss based on our experiences. The experiences are proof enough unfortunately.

Most are the same as us, but unfortunately, there are a disproportionate number of them who are a waste of oxygen who the world would be better off without.

I may be a serial killer in the embryo stage.

 

[jaycee]

Yeah I know what you mean bayview, probably enough nit picking from me !

 

[porp_e]

The very interesting debate over 'do i treat it like my house or not'.

Not sure if this was in reference to my comment but if so I think you have misunderstood. Not thinking of it as my property and treating it like my own are two distinct things. Thinking of it as someone else's house (which it is) means I never get the idea that I'd like to 're-do the kitchen' for eg (ie I was pointing out not understanding how some tenants can be so demanding) it doesnt mean I go and trash the place because I dont own it
We were both saying the same thing just in different ways