Drano + plunging for 10 mins for $100.
Is it valid that I have to pay $100 to get someone use a plunger?
- Thread starter YvonneVincent
- Start date
No. I bought my plunger new for $2 at my local IGA. Maybe it takes more than 30 seconds to walk down to the store. My point being it's a very cheap easy thing to try.
Why did the tenant not think of using one first?
God, I'm sounding like you
Because you are thinking like a LL, not a tenant.
Tenants need to be treated like children. Sometimes they behave badly and trash their rooms (aka rentals)
Why did the tenant not think of using one first?
God, I'm sounding like you
Think really really hard, you will probably come up with an answer to that.
a small update
sent the pm two emails yesterday
one for routine stuff, emailed him yesterday replied today
another email re billing the tenant for using the plunger, he decided not to reply to this email
should I email to confirm that he will proceed with my request?
sent the pm two emails yesterday
one for routine stuff, emailed him yesterday replied today
another email re billing the tenant for using the plunger, he decided not to reply to this email
should I email to confirm that he will proceed with my request?
a small update
sent the pm two emails yesterday
one for routine stuff, emailed him yesterday replied today
another email re billing the tenant for using the plunger, he decided not to reply to this email
should I email to confirm that he will proceed with my request?
I require our employees to confirm any email I send them.
Yvonne,
You've only got a few options....
(1) Continue to pay up handsomely for a Plumber whenever the Tenant clicks their fingers. This has many advantages and only one disadvantage.
It involves no arguing, no ruffled feathers, no action on their part, no change of behaviour and no cash outlay for either the PM or Tenant. This is what they would all prefer. You can't possibly be accused of not complying with your responsibilities....and best of all, you don't have to start delving into areas such as female hygiene products, what they are using to wipe their **** with - newspaper will clog up stuff good and proper and also always using the half flush when a full flush should be used. Trust me, cos you're not in the toilet standing right there, you have no idea. You'll be told whatever answer they know won't cost them anything....cos you can't prove a damn thing. Tree roots will always be a possibility, and that will cost you even more to find out....and then there is the camera....even more. Spend a weeks rent finding out exactly what is going down the loo. But haven't you got a mortgage to pay ??
The only downside is your cashflow keeps taking a hit. Plumbers make a good living in Aust.
(2) Start taking limited control of your asset. The PM has no interest in playing this game. You've already seen that. The Tenant has multiple things against you, both on a privacy level and by the weighty RTA, totally on their side.
Having read the RTA backwards, you cannot compel the Tenant to use a plunger. If they tell you to get stuffed, well, you'll be back to calling a plumber.
What Kathryn and others suggest is commendable, and it's something I try and do whilst treading very gently....because as a residential Landlord you have absolutely zero legislative horsepower to back you up.
When it comes to pushing **** down a pipe, residential Landlord's are pushing **** uphill to avoid the cost, especially if the Tenant doesn't want to play your little cost saving game.
You've only got a few options....
(1) Continue to pay up handsomely for a Plumber whenever the Tenant clicks their fingers. This has many advantages and only one disadvantage.
It involves no arguing, no ruffled feathers, no action on their part, no change of behaviour and no cash outlay for either the PM or Tenant. This is what they would all prefer. You can't possibly be accused of not complying with your responsibilities....and best of all, you don't have to start delving into areas such as female hygiene products, what they are using to wipe their **** with - newspaper will clog up stuff good and proper and also always using the half flush when a full flush should be used. Trust me, cos you're not in the toilet standing right there, you have no idea. You'll be told whatever answer they know won't cost them anything....cos you can't prove a damn thing. Tree roots will always be a possibility, and that will cost you even more to find out....and then there is the camera....even more. Spend a weeks rent finding out exactly what is going down the loo. But haven't you got a mortgage to pay ??
The only downside is your cashflow keeps taking a hit. Plumbers make a good living in Aust.
(2) Start taking limited control of your asset. The PM has no interest in playing this game. You've already seen that. The Tenant has multiple things against you, both on a privacy level and by the weighty RTA, totally on their side.
Having read the RTA backwards, you cannot compel the Tenant to use a plunger. If they tell you to get stuffed, well, you'll be back to calling a plumber.
What Kathryn and others suggest is commendable, and it's something I try and do whilst treading very gently....because as a residential Landlord you have absolutely zero legislative horsepower to back you up.
When it comes to pushing **** down a pipe, residential Landlord's are pushing **** uphill to avoid the cost, especially if the Tenant doesn't want to play your little cost saving game.
Last edited:
I ve been waiting for ur comment lol
I will forward ur post to the tenants n the pm
Really want to join the commercial field like what u be achieved but I just don't know where to start! Need a tough mentor like u lol
I will forward ur post to the tenants n the pm
Really want to join the commercial field like what u be achieved but I just don't know where to start! Need a tough mentor like u lol
I will forward ur post to the tenants n the pm
hmmm....maybe not such a wise move....it confirms you as the Landlord are just the chump at the end of the line who needs to pay up.
Forward it if you wish, but it won't help your cause, which I presume is to reduce your operating costs.
That's a risky strategy, relying oin the tenant's apathy.
On second thoughts, it's probably not risky at all.
Having said that, the legislation is not in the LL's favour, and if the OP did go to a tribunal, she would almost certainly lose.
That's a risky strategy, relying oin the tenant's apathy.
On second thoughts, it's probably not risky at all.
Having said that, the legislation is not in the LL's favour, and if the OP did go to a tribunal, she would almost certainly lose.
For $100..I'd take the risk..what does the OP have to lose?
Wouldn't the tenant need to take the LL to tribunal?
It's like a tax dedection that is in a grey area. The worse that will happen, is you need to pay.
I am feeling extra apathetic today (lack of sleep), but I don't think I could be bothered wasting all the time and effort for a miniscule chance of getting my 100 bucks back.
As Kenny Rogers said, got to know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em...
I'm not sure of the procedure for retaining money from a bond here, but where we are, we deduct any cleaning, damage, arrears from the tenant's security deposit and then lodge the claim.(we are required to hold the bond money personally in a separate bank account) If the tenant doesn't agree, they must serve us personally or via registered mail for a hearing.
If the Director agrees with the tenant we must return the money.
Most don't bother, because they know they were wrong.
In SA the bond has to be lodged with the state govt body responsible for overseeing the tenancies legislation. I think it's the same in other states.
This makes it harder for the LL to retain any bond monies, because release of the money requires a form to filled out and signed by both tenant and LL (or agent).
There are ways around this (more forms, of course) but it is much harder than just withholding an amount at the return of the bond.
In the past, we have managed to retain an amount from the bond to pay for cleaning, but it was a slow process.
In Queensland we have lodged the refund of bond form without a tenant signature with the amount filled in saying what we want to keep and what we believe is fair to give to the tenant. We've only had to do this once. Most tenants get their full bond back.
The RTA gets the form signed only by us, writes to the tenant, and if they don't object, we each get what is on the form. If they don't agree, the tenant can take us to the tribunal. We get the form in first so that they have to initiate and pay for the tribunal visit.
In the case of a tenant leaving without giving a forwarding address (which happened in our case), the letter from the RTA asking if they object to how we want the bond to be split up goes to the tenant's last known address, which is the house they have just left without giving a forwarding address
.This is how it worked when we had to apply to have bond handed to us.
Back to the question. We have an IP with a troublesome downstairs loo which has been blocked twice in a year. First time it was sanitary items. Second time it was tree roots, which have been fixed.
They know that if it blocks again and we send a plumber and it is something they have flushed, they will pay the bill. Hasn't happened yet but they have been warned.
