Lease Break – 6 months into 12 mnth lease. Landlord cops 50%

AlmostBob said:
Thank you for the wishes,

its never the $170, there's always a $100K coming behind
we learned very much the hard way not to trust 'professional' standard of care, checked the return and found the error before audit, but after the accountant had submitted it.

in your case the pm's interest won't always align with yours
on a scale of 1 -> totally paranoid, about a four is good.

its the Canada Revenue Act, here

what you expect.
Income Tax Act 1986, and,
Income Tax Assessment Act 1997
I do have a tyro's of, company structure in Aus requires it, the family business has been around forever, all the cousins got raised in it.

You can learn by making a mistake or from somebody who made the mistake, the second way is easier
Click to expand...

I believe i have a handle on things. I have an accounting background and started life as a auditor so I always have a healthy dose of scepticism and conservatism. Now i ply my trade in the IT side of things now.

The intial portion of the letting fee at my expense did not fit well with me when it was the tenant who decided to leave early. Short of reading the legislation, I thought I could get some advice, not bullying, from my fellow property investors.

Just out of interest how far is Nova Scotia from Montreal?

I know, I know - go look at an Atlas. Go to wikepedia!!!
 
Thnks Dazz. Too many words to read. Cant be bothered reading. Thnks for the reply anyway. Others may be interested. Any way back to spending some time with the kids.
 
I dont think we were being insulted,
Everybody around the maritimes is glad that Montreal is 1300km away
the further away they are, the gladder they get

People in BC Alberta Manitoba NWT Yukon are happier still, they are further from Quebec

Note 1::
Mr Webster, If gladder is not yet a word, make it so, every adjective should have a comparative and a superlative:
Note 2::
tongue firmly in cheek :p
 
This is my reading of the Act. It looks like its very broad. There is no reference to whether the re- letting fee should be split or paid in full by the Tenant. At the end of the day its all about determine(ing) the
compensation (if any) to be paid by the applicant for the order to the other
party because of the reduction in the term of the tenancy agreement.

So it seems like its a business practice of the rental agency whether to charge the tenant the full re-letting fee or apportion it.

In future I am going to insist the property manager charges the tenant the full amount. If the tenant is not happy they can get the Tribunal to assess the compensation.

What do you reckon? I am not interested in the commercial property views of DAZZ and his canadian mate from an area more remote than southern tassie.

All other views welcome

From the legisation.............

Reduction of fixed term tenancy agreement

234. Reduction of fixed term tenancy agreement

(1) On the application of a party to a fixed term tenancy agreement, the
Tribunal may make an order-

(a) reducing the term of the agreement by a period stated in the order;
and

(b) making any variations to the terms of the agreement that are necessary
because of the reduction of the term.

(2) The Tribunal may only make an order under this section if it is satisfied
that, because of an unforeseen change in the applicant's circumstances, the
severe hardship which the applicant would suffer if the term of the agreement
were not reduced would be greater than the hardship which the other party
would suffer if the term were reduced.

(2A) Without limiting subsection (2), the Tribunal may be satisfied the
applicant has experienced an unforeseen change in the applicant's
circumstances that will cause the applicant to suffer severe hardship for the
purposes of that subsection if-

(a) the applicant is a tenant under the fixed term tenancy agreement; and

(b) the applicant-

(i) is excluded from the rented premises the subject of the agreement
under a family violence intervention order; or

(ii) is a protected person under a family violence intervention order and
is seeking to reduce the term of the agreement to protect their own
safety or the safety of their children.

(3) In making an order under this section, the Tribunal may determine the
compensation (if any) to be paid by the applicant for the order to the other
party because of the reduction in the term of the tenancy agreement.
 
toony said:
Geez I love your tone. Thnks for taking time out of your mega millions commercial property world to help me along.

I do rely on my PM. I just wanted to use the collective knowledge of this residential property forum to confirm the approach of my PM. I am not interested in reading any legislation for the sakes of $150. In the past, for a lease break my other PM charged the full amount to the renter.

Incidentally, I have been doing this now for about 13 years.
Dazz said:
Why are you getting your information from the PM ?? As a Landlord in the Landlording game, why don't you know the rules of the game, or at the very least have a copy of the rule book close at hand. To get their licence, the PM studied a wee little book of about 60 pages. Surely you aren't relying on them are you ??

As the landlord, you should know the rules of the game.

1. If you really cared, you'd - Go and buy yourself a copy of the RTA for about $ 14.00 from the Govt printers.

2. Or, if you are like some people and buying a copy is too much effort and too expensive, download it for free and print it out for future reference.

3. Or, if you are like most people, don't place any burden on your own shoulders and be guided by what the PM tells you, still not knowing whether it is HS or not. Then by all means, come and post it up here and ask anon. folk who cannot and will not warrant anything to you.

How long have you played this game for....and when were you thinking of reading the rules of the game ??
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
toony said:
Thank you.

Dazz - Hope you feel good/better about yourself.
Click to expand...

For once I'm able to read a deleted post of Dazz's!
Why is it that with more and more regularity people are unable to take negative feedback and constructive criticism!?
I agree with Dazz's point and find his feedback useful.

Let us know how you get on.
 
fokas said:
For once I'm able to read a deleted post of Dazz's!
Why is it that with more and more regularity people are unable to take negative feedback and constructive criticism!?
I agree with Dazz's point and find his feedback useful.

Let us know how you get on.
Click to expand...

Thnks for adding no value whatsoever. What is Dazz's point? - go read the legislation or dont trust your Property manager? If i trusted my PM I would not have asked this question of fellow property investors.
 
Last edited:
AlmostBob said:
It took 13 years, to not trust your property manager
or
It took 13 years, to ask
Click to expand...

What are you on about? So since you know the Act so well. Well you did scan the cover. Did i find the correct section? If so, where does it say i have to split the re-letting fee?

Time to contribute big boy!!!!!!!!
 
I have just re-read a (Vic) lease with tenants who 4 weeks into a 12mth lease moved out.

The PM had added this clause under Additional special conditions "should the TENANT need to vacate the property prior to the lease expiry date then the TENANT will be required to pay rent up until another tenant moves into the property, will be liable to pay the re letting fee of one and half weeks rent plus GST and all re-advertising costs.
 
toony said:
What are you on about? So since you know the Act so well. Well you did scan the cover. Did i find the correct section? If so, where does it say i have to split the re-letting fee?

Time to contribute big boy!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...
Sorry you dont read well, no wonder its taken 13 years for you to get to the stage of asking

the booklet in the image was
Residential Tenancies Act
CHAPTER 401 OF THE REVISED STATUTES, 1989
as amended by

1992,c.31,ss.1,4(b) and (c), 5(1), 8(1) and (2)
(except s,18(4B) as enacted thereby), 9,10, 14-16;
1994,c.32; 1993,c.40, ss. 1-7, 8(2)-14; 1997, c. 7;
2002, c 10, ss. 23-37; 2002, c. 30, ss, 16-18

and Regulations

© 2005 Her Majesty the Queen in right of the Province of Nova Scotia
Printed and Published by the Queen's Printer
Halifax
​

The Province Of Nova Scotia is not anywhere close to Victoria
The terms and conditions of the Act under which I operate, are likely as much use to you as the terms and conditions of the Act under which you are supposed to operate, since you have not read either.

you were an auditor, past tense, consider the obvious remarks made.

two of the p-s in PPPPPP stand for Proper Planning, the last three apply
 
Now that the legislation is very general (no-one can point me to the specific section) and thanks to Chasethesun and others I will have a detailed look at the lease now and see how specific it is.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
chasethesun said:
I have just re-read a (Vic) lease with tenants who 4 weeks into a 12mth lease moved out.

The PM had added this clause under Additional special conditions "should the TENANT need to vacate the property prior to the lease expiry date then the TENANT will be required to pay rent up until another tenant moves into the property, will be liable to pay the re letting fee of one and half weeks rent plus GST and all re-advertising costs.
Click to expand...

Thank you. Thats the kind of information I have been looking for. I will check my lease in more detail now.
 
chasethesun said:
I have just re-read a (Vic) lease with tenants who 4 weeks into a 12mth lease moved out.

The PM had added this clause under Additional special conditions "should the TENANT need to vacate the property prior to the lease expiry date then the TENANT will be required to pay rent up until another tenant moves into the property, will be liable to pay the re letting fee of one and half weeks rent plus GST and all re-advertising costs.
Click to expand...


Some time ago I read in API that when a PM adds conditions to leases it is often not in legally correct terms. This could be one of them.

I see all kinds of problems with this clause.
 
I have been collecting the various "special conditions" that have been posted here from time to time and will be using them to tailor a whole raft of special conditions next time I re-let my Melbourne IP to new tenants.

I'm very experienced at writing development consent conditions and also have practiced as a solicitor (for a very brief time) so I'll try to make sure that these conditions will be lawful.

One of the conditions I want to impose is the requirement for direct debit. Does anyone else do that here???
 

Similar threads

Lil Skater
Think ahead for your leases!
Replies
16
Views
3K
Lil Skater
Lil Skater
N
Renewing a lease Qld
Replies
3
Views
1K
Nattl3s
N
C
Electrcity Charges - Granny Flat
Replies
18
Views
4K
dabbler
D
D
tenant gave me notice. Next contract 12 or 6 month lease
Replies
3
Views
1K
beachside
beachside
sashatheman
Tenant requested to break fixed lease - We want to move in
Replies
3
Views
1K
sashatheman
sashatheman
Back
Top