Problem with entry report

Hi guys,

I have a problem I hope you guys can help with - Heres the story...

I have a fully furnished apartment that is now 3 years old.

When the first PM rented the property to the tenants, the furniture was in perfect condition. The first PM was very lousy though so I ended up changing agents.

The tenants have now left after a year and the furniture is now wrecked. They have obviously had a cat in the apartment that has chewed and scratched all the couches and tables. Futhermore, when the new PM did a property inspection, the tenants had a big cat toy in the corner which they said they "were looking after for a friend". The tenants are denying they had a pet which is strictly not allowed by the building.

Now heres the problem - the first PM just took a list of the inventory for the entry report - he did not state if the furniture was in good or bad condition. I have photos of how the apartment looked beforehand but these photos were not signed off by both parties.

The new PM says that I cannot claim for damage because the entry report does not state the condition of the furniture. However, wouldnt it be assumed that furniture is in good condition unless stated otherwise? If the furniture was badly damaged to begin with, wouldnt the tenant have stated that in the entry report for their protection?

Now I am about to start renting the property for holiday rentals. If management find the furniture is not up to scratch they will make me replace the furniture at my loss. Where do I stand?

Please help
 
The tenants have now left after a year and the furniture is now wrecked. They have obviously had a cat in the apartment that has chewed and scratched all the couches and tables. ... Now I am about to start renting the property for holiday rentals. If management find the furniture is not up to scratch they will make me replace the furniture at my loss.
You have to replace the furniture, pronto, whether you can recover your losses from the tenant or not.
seano4ever said:
Futhermore, when the new PM did a property inspection, the tenants had a big cat toy in the corner which they said they "were looking after for a friend". The tenants are denying they had a pet which is strictly not allowed by the building.
Even if they were "looking after it for a friend", it's still not allowed. A breach notice should have been issued immediately.
seano4ever said:
The new PM says that I cannot claim for damage because the entry report does not state the condition of the furniture.
You can claim whatever you want; the PM's expressing an opinion about whether it will stand up if the tenant disputes it. I'd certainly be lodging a form 4 (bond claim) with a claim for the damaged furniture and at least trying it on.
 
Even if they were "looking after it for a friend", it's still not allowed. A breach notice should have been issued immediately.

.

Ozeperp, you couldn't issue a breach notice if they only had 'a big cat toy', wouldn't you need to see the cat itself? :p Although, it does seem highly unlikely one would mind a cat toy for a friend. :)
 
Ozeperp, you couldn't issue a breach notice if they only had 'a big cat toy', wouldn't you need to see the cat itself? :p Although, it does seem highly unlikely one would mind a cat toy for a friend. :)
LOL - I assumed it was the CAT they were minding for a friend, not the cat toy. It didn't even occur to me that somebody would claim to be minding a cat toy for a friend - that's absurd!

Oh dear, what will they think of next?
 
yes it is the cat toy they are minding for a friend

so obviously the tenant has taken the cat toy from the friends house to my apartment on Level 33 so it can have a nice view of the canals
 
Years ago we were interested in purchasing a unit on the Gold Coast.

Sticking point was that the vendor was in the USA and the unit was allegedly fully furnished with furniture that had cost over $20K (this was in the 1980s). Problem was that the existing furniture bore no resemblance to the inventory, i.e., a 2 seater vinyl couch instead of the listed 3 seater leather couch. You get the drift.

Furniture would have fetched $500 on a good day, but the vendor was adamant.

We walked away.

It's easier now with digital photos.
Marg
 
Thanks for the input every1

there has been a bit more of development in the story...

I have just located a folder of pictures that were taken 13 days prior to the tenants moving into the apartment. When a photo is taken with a digital camera, it creates a digital imprint in the photo that shows what camera model it was taken with, the time, date, etc...

Although the tenants have not signed these pictures, it shows the apartment in very good condition. No one was living in the apartment during the 13 days.

Will the judge take this into consideration if they have not been signed by the agent and the tenant?
 
Top