Yes a reasonable decision in the circumstances.
I'm not sure what you mean - bait advertising is straight up unlawful already.
Increased rent once house accepted by students
- Thread starter JazZing
- Start date
Yes a reasonable decision in the circumstances.
I'm not sure what you mean - bait advertising is straight up unlawful already.
That doesn't sound reasonable. There is a market out there. Why would they be taking something they are unhappy with if there are other properties that are suitable and have lower rent per person?
Some tenancy authorities might be encouraging individual leases in student group houses. That could create some difficulties and others might comment on that.
I'm not sure what you mean - bait advertising is straight up unlawful already.[/QUOTE]
I agree about bait advertising being wrong thatbum, I was referring to putting up the rent after a tenancy has commenced, not what happened with my son and his friends. They were worried about getting a place with no references and small incomes so were easy targets but they and myself have learnt something from this.
I have a separate issue of struggling to increase rent to market level on a house I manage myself which is more like Wylies situation he mentioned in this thread.
I agree about bait advertising being wrong thatbum, I was referring to putting up the rent after a tenancy has commenced, not what happened with my son and his friends. They were worried about getting a place with no references and small incomes so were easy targets but they and myself have learnt something from this.
I have a separate issue of struggling to increase rent to market level on a house I manage myself which is more like Wylies situation he mentioned in this thread.
Oh okay - yeah there's still a fair bit of protection for tenants against rent increases.
- Can't be more than every 6 months maximum
- Can be challenged if above market rent
- Renegotiated leases have 30 days before an increase kicks in
- Fixed term tenancies must have future rent increases disclosed on the lease
I'm going to side with the agent on this one. For every additional person, there is extra damage to be done. There are bad eggs at every age, however unless you are going to screen every single applicant in a manner similar to a job interview, it is very hard to gauge what they are really like. Which leaves the option of speed screening - whereby you take into account age, type of job, longevity of job, marital status, relationship of tenants, financial position.
I would never rent my property out to 4 unrelated students, to me it just spells trouble. Doesn't matter if there is or isn't a guarantor. The numbers just do not stack up for me (unless i was acting as a slum lord and intended to pack 4 students per room
)In this particular situation, could it be that when the students looked at the property they alluded (not said) there may be 3 tenants and at time of application there were 4?
Or perhaps, was the agent nice enough to convince the landlord to rent it out to these students for an additional premium to cover potential damages and increased wear and tear? Was it taken into consideration that the agent could have simply declined them (like most generally would), but gave them a chance to pay a bit more to secure the place?
At the end of the day, the students had an option to walk away, but didn't because they obviously liked this place. Its not like the agent held them to ransom telling them they had to sign it (though it may have felt like this).
Anyways, i think you did the right them in telling them to suck it up. Just like a job, the first one is the one where you cut your teeth and cop some crap. But when you're done with it, you have experience that you can take away and apply to the next job.
I can see why you choose to see it as bait advertising. But not everything is black and white. In this case, I see this as risk premium - and the tenants were given an option to reject it. They chose to accept it.
Its 4 students - agent was under the impression it was 3. Their chances of finding another place that is decent is low. They could have taken the other one available to them, but didn't.
Would you think its better the agent just rejected them as opposed to giving them a chance?
Its 4 students - agent was under the impression it was 3. Their chances of finding another place that is decent is low. They could have taken the other one available to them, but didn't.
Would you think its better the agent just rejected them as opposed to giving them a chance?
In short, yes. If they were going to reject the 4 students or ask for more money from them, then put it in advertising.
So then the 4 students would know not to waste their time applying for such a property - and agents can't abuse the fact that they had to spend time viewing and applying for the property to better their bargaining power for an immediate rent increase.
I'm sure the students beg to differ. They may not be happy about the increase, but in comparison to not getting it all, I think they would be more upset by that.
Also, i think stating that students cannot apply in an ad would be somewhat discrimination or are you suggesting agents put something similar in their ads for students?
Eg.
For lease $400 per week.
If students, add $20
For every additional student, add $10
If no rental history, add $20 (applies to every student that does no have rental history)
Might as well add accidental glass breakage and fusion cover in there too for good measure?
Whats next, putting in ads that people of african/asian/indian/whites/european decent need not apply or that premium will be charged based on their race?
They applied as 4 students and chose this house due to its price and proximity to uni, being a 10 min walk, train then bus ride. The price was a major factor so I think the agent has 'baited' them like thatbum has said and if this happened in a shop you could do the same, walk or take it at the higher price. It is still false advertising whichever way you look at it and being green and a little desperate they were ideal 'little fish' to hook.
You do realise their is a potentially greater chance of increased wear and tear as well damage to a property when it comes to renting out to students.
Your son may be good at looking after things, the other 3 might be good, but they have friends who will come over and they may not be good. Everytime I have a particular family member come over I cringe when they try to help out as they will do more damage than good (even simple things like washing the dishes, i find crusty pieces on it).
I had two students apply for my property on the first week. I declined them and waited an extra 1.5 weeks for another tenant.
Maybe the agent felt sorry for them and decided to give them a chance and convinced the owner to take them on in exchange for a slight increase. Who's to say that isn't the case.
Your son may be good at looking after things, the other 3 might be good, but they have friends who will come over and they may not be good. Everytime I have a particular family member come over I cringe when they try to help out as they will do more damage than good (even simple things like washing the dishes, i find crusty pieces on it).
I had two students apply for my property on the first week. I declined them and waited an extra 1.5 weeks for another tenant.
Maybe the agent felt sorry for them and decided to give them a chance and convinced the owner to take them on in exchange for a slight increase. Who's to say that isn't the case.
