locks on windows ?

I have been asked to add key locks to all windows in the house which I assume is probably related to insurance or something. Is this a normal request ?
 
If the tenants have asked you, and you don't want to do it, I would tell them they rented it as is and if they don't like it they can move at the end of the lease.

It all depends on whether you believe window locks are a value add to the house. Some tenants asked recently for security grills after several houses in the street were robbed. We agreed to install grills to the vulnerable windows (easily accessible from the back deck areas). It cost us $2K but is a plus for any future tenants.

We would not have done it had it not been a value add.
 
I do window locks and RCD if not present as soon as settlement takes place. Relatively inexpensive, key locks add a small amount of rentability factor.

Yes being a landlord is about the dollars, but safety security and retention of tenants to minimise vacancy and reletting costs is also a factor.
 
I have been asked to add key locks to all windows in the house which I assume is probably related to insurance or something. Is this a normal request ?

Requested by who?

Residential property, highrise or commercial?

All windows?


The request may have some merit (or none) dependant on the factors, but you need to expand your information further.

pinkboy
 
You have not provided enough information.

Are you the LL or the tenant?
Who has asked you to provide window locks?
1. The PM
2. The tenant
3. Your insurance company?

Assuming you are the LL and it is a tenant request, then you can:
1. Tell them, "No", as they rented it in its present state and condition
2. See if this is the 'norm' for the area, and if it is, you might give some consideration to your tenant's common law rights to be safe and secure in the property. (LL's have been successfully sued before by denying the provision of security doors when the tenant was afterwards assaulted).
3. Give in to this and every other ambit claim that this tenant can think of :rolleyes:
 
sorry if it wasnt clear, PM has asked me at tenant request. The windows do lock already just they dont have key locks. There are decent security doors and with doors have deadlocks so I dont think it will really change the security view of the pace value wise.

thought saying house would remove the question of highrise or commercial but yes residential.

its early days and part of a long list so was just interested in peoples general opinions.
 
If the windows lock already, I would say no.

If the tenant is saying they need to have key locks for insurance purposes, tell them to change insurance providers.

We have similar issues with the tenant's insurance provider, and we just say try another company. We are not changing/installing anything.
 
The "Duty of Care" devil, is one that we always have to be careful of. I can recall that on one occasion, when went to change insurers, the new one listed key locks were required on all accessible windows. In the same vane that deadlocks are an insurance requirement. Remember, we all have the requirement to mitigate loss. At that time we chose to stay with the old insurance company.
Now, if a tenant’s insurer has the same stipulation, and they have an event, and their insurer declines the claim, what may happen. Also, if the current insurer advise that they will not continue the claim, does telling the tenant to choose a new insurer lessen any liability. Insurance, what a can of worms.
We have all observed that we need to continue to upgrade the standard of accommodation we offer, as the expectations of tenants (read quality tenants) continues to increase, as new properties come on the market with new bells and whistles. Doing these upgrades, not only attracts tenants more quickly, but also better quality ones.
So having a property that will be "more acceptable" to insurance companies, may not be a bad thing. I do appreciate that these comments have to be tempered by the capacity of the LL to attend to these issues at the time, however I feel it’s worthwhile having a medium to long term "upgrade" plan in place.
 
I used to run a part time business of installing security devices, deadlocks, window locks etc. and never heard of an insurance company insisting on keyed window locks. Many provide a minimal discount if installed.

95% of intruders are opportunistic. Stop them from getting in or delay their attempts for more than 5 min and they move on. An intruder only finds out the window locks are keyed once they're in and trying to get stuff out....and that's only if they can't get the deadlocked doors.

If you have non-keyed locks on the windows now leave them there. Ask the tenants to provide quotes between keyed and non- keyed window locks insurance, and you'll make up the difference. Less than $100 pa v $30-50 per window.
 
sorry if it wasnt clear, PM has asked me at tenant request. The windows do lock already just they dont have key locks. There are decent security doors and with doors have deadlocks so I dont think it will really change the security view of the pace value wise.

thought saying house would remove the question of highrise or commercial but yes residential.

its early days and part of a long list so was just interested in peoples general opinions.
If they are sliding windows I have wooden dowling rod fitted to the tracks. This makes it much more difficult for a burgler to force the window open, although if they really want to get in they will... It seems to work as good as anything, and very cheap.

Mystery
 
If they are sliding windows I have wooden dowling rod fitted to the tracks. This makes it much more difficult for a burgler to force the window open, although if they really want to get in they will... It seems to work as good as anything, and very cheap.

Mystery

Unless they smash the window and pull out the rod.

Pin Locks cost not much and if locked are very hard to get past and they dont like climbing through broken glass.

Peter 14.7
 
The request from your PM is what is frustrating.

Rather than pass over the request, why did they not inform you what your legal requirements are under your states Act and provide advise.

I appreciate that they are not paid what they may be worth but geez, how about some preemptive management.

Personally I would advise the PM that their business leased the premises "as is" condition and if any item was not in line with the local act then they should have brought it to your attention earlier.

You would be happy to fix all defects as supplied by them.
 
Install those ugly external window shutter things that look like garage roller doors for windows just to spite the tenant. couldn't be safer.
 
I just logged off an online training seminar that discussed this issue.

Apparently the tribunal in QLD may award damages to the tenant if the tenant sues the owner for failing to secure the property if:

  • The tenant has reported the 'security issue' to the landlord/agent
  • The request has been ignored or denied without reasonable grounds
  • The property is burgled and the police report shows that the baddies gained access using the 'unsecured' area of the house.

It is not a specified legal obligation of the owner to provide key locked windows, security screens, bars etc (only that the premises are able to be secured)- However, the landlord does have a legal duty of care to the tenant, and can be found liable in some instances.

Naturally the circumstances are vague and open to interpretation. If the window does not lock at all - I would insist that my owner installs a lock. If the tenant wants EXTRA security, then I would propose that the tenant bear a rent increase of $5-10 per week if the owner agrees to their requests. This would satisfy me that I have done what I can to provide a reasonable response, and if the tenant declines, too bad.



I am also currently battling with a tenant who was broken into via a solid wood front door. He had requested a security screen door several times but was unwilling to compensate the owner by way of paying some of the bill, or rent increase.

This is the second time he has been broken into via this door (still no contents insurance) and the owner has replaced the door twice. The first time it was smashed down with an axe, this time, the locks were drilled out and the door ended up looking like swiss cheese. The tenant accepted the property in the inspected condition (no security screen) and it is not unusual for a house to only have a solid wood door. The property was 'secured' in that the burglars had to go to considerable effort to get in.

That one has yet to go to QCAT, (hopefully I can negotiate a way out of that) but it would be interesting to hear the adjudicator's interpretation of the law and my landlord's responsibility and duty of care.
 
I read that differently. A window "locks" with the standard fitting that might have been installed with the window in 1930. My reading of that means the standard window lock will suffice, even if it doesn't require a key.

Yes can be read that way. Does group then together though and talk about keys. Be interested if anyone has experience with the rule. I don't mind fitting window locks to my properties.
 
I just logged off an online training seminar that discussed this issue.

Apparently the tribunal in QLD may award damages to the tenant if the tenant sues the owner for failing to secure the property if:

  • The tenant has reported the 'security issue' to the landlord/agent
  • The request has been ignored or denied without reasonable grounds
  • The property is burgled and the police report shows that the baddies gained access using the 'unsecured' area of the house.

It is not a specified legal obligation of the owner to provide key locked windows, security screens, bars etc (only that the premises are able to be secured)- However, the landlord does have a legal duty of care to the tenant, and can be found liable in some instances.

Naturally the circumstances are vague and open to interpretation. If the window does not lock at all - I would insist that my owner installs a lock. If the tenant wants EXTRA security, then I would propose that the tenant bear a rent increase of $5-10 per week if the owner agrees to their requests. This would satisfy me that I have done what I can to provide a reasonable response, and if the tenant declines, too bad.



I am also currently battling with a tenant who was broken into via a solid wood front door. He had requested a security screen door several times but was unwilling to compensate the owner by way of paying some of the bill, or rent increase.

This is the second time he has been broken into via this door (still no contents insurance) and the owner has replaced the door twice. The first time it was smashed down with an axe, this time, the locks were drilled out and the door ended up looking like swiss cheese. The tenant accepted the property in the inspected condition (no security screen) and it is not unusual for a house to only have a solid wood door. The property was 'secured' in that the burglars had to go to considerable effort to get in.

That one has yet to go to QCAT, (hopefully I can negotiate a way out of that) but it would be interesting to hear the adjudicator's interpretation of the law and my landlord's responsibility and duty of care.

I would get rid of the tenant, as it seems it could be a result of a personal vindetta.
 
They're moving out in January, and they really don't seem to be the cause of the break ins.

It's a new property and they've been there for 3 years (since it was built), and I believe they don't know why it's happening.

They're a young couple, he works for the red cross and she's a nurse. They're actually nice people who I think just have terrible luck..

Anyway, I'll chalk it up to experience.
 
Back
Top