Property Agent trying to waive responsiblity

I received an interesting letter from my Property Agent yesterday. The letter stated that all new landlords managed by them need to have Barclay MiS Protect & Collect insurance which would cost $44 per annum. They said as an existing landlord I had the option of not subscribing however I needed to fill out a form declining their offer before May otherwise I would automatically be charged.

This annoyed me greatly as I find it extremely poor to be automatically subscribed for something unless you write in and decline. Also the slip they want you to sign also seems to be a way of waiving their obligations as a managing agent.

It states “The landlord acknowledges that the managing agent’s duties and responsibilities under the management agreement cease upon obtaining a Residential Tenancies Tribunal Order in respect of any debt arising out of the rental or my/out investment property mentioned about and therafter I/we am responsible for all costs and fees associated with the recovery of any outstanding monies”

I just want to clarify what normally is the managing agents responsibility in regard to chasing monies etc. I find this whole thing extremely onerous. I don't have a high opinion of the agent in the first place and this makes me even less happy with them.
 
Why are you still with them if you don't have a high opinion of them?

I'd be asking in here for some recommendations for a new PM in your area and giving your current one notice.
 
Unfortunately the choice is limited in the area we are and the agents are all as bad as each other. There really is no better alternative. All I can do is manage the agent to insure he is doing the right thing.
 
If you have given all the other agents an opportunity to manage the property and they have all failed you really only have a few options.

1. Continue with the current agent. Sounds like a hassle to me but we have areas like this.
2. Go back to the most competent of the agent you have used previously.
3. Self manage. As you are apparently going to be chasing the debts anyway then perhaps this is an option.
4. Sell and purchase in a better serviced area.

Regards

Andrew
 
If you don't have a choice don't worry about it.

We're talking about $30 after tax. Not worth stewing about if the other PMs in the area are just as bad.
 
Trying to think back to my contract law units at uni...:eek:

I'm pretty sure that silence, in regards to an offer, cannot be construed as acceptance, in other words, when they say that if they do not hear from you within a certain timeframe, then they will assume your acceptance, you have not legally accepted their offer and are not obliged to pay anything.
Any lawyers out there care to confirm/deny??

Boods
 
Thanks Boods...exactly what I was thinking. The whole things seems wrong - from the automatic acceptance to the signing away of their obligations. Maybe its a trade pactices thing???
 
Bay Islands - in Moreton Bay
Whilst obviously preferefable to have the PM close by, would it be possible to have it managed from 'the mainland', say Redland Bay or Victoria Pt.

May just give you a few more options. In saying that, if it were me, I would probably prefer my PM on the island itself, just thinking left of field.

Regards
Marty
 
my thinking exactly - I know a very good PM who may well take that on...you may just have to contribute to the cost of the ferry for inspections, but otherwise shouldn't be a drama.
 
Unfortunately the choice is limited in the area we are and the agents are all as bad as each other. There really is no better alternative. All I can do is manage the agent to insure he is doing the right thing.

I sympathise with you. We have a couple of small IP's in an area with little choice as to who manages, as the lot of them are crap. We recently had one PM send us a notice to quit their management because we asked them to raise the rent on a house a mere $10pw (still under market, I might add).:eek:

They said that they had provided a good tenant, and since they weren't good enough for us they would terminate the management. Apparently the poor tenant can not afford the increase and as such will be forced to leave. Considering this poor tenant is working and my dole bludger/pensioners in Western Sydney are paying substantially more, I just shake my head in amazement.

Yes! This property is earmarked for sale. It was before this happened. This is one area that we will eventually be free of, but properties were purchased here several years ago now, and it is a slow process. We need to get someone in paying what the market rent is before we can advertise the place for sale, since in this area properties are very yeild orientated.
 
I'm pretty sure that silence, in regards to an offer, cannot be construed as acceptance, in other words, when they say that if they do not hear from you within a certain timeframe, then they will assume your acceptance, you have not legally accepted their offer and are not obliged to pay anything.
Any lawyers out there care to confirm/deny??
I'm not a lawyer (sorry for bragging ;)) but the relevant precedent is well-established (we inherited it from the Brits) and the case is Felthouse v Bindley.
 
Trying to think back to my contract law units at uni...:eek:

I'm pretty sure that silence, in regards to an offer, cannot be construed as acceptance, in other words, when they say that if they do not hear from you within a certain timeframe, then they will assume your acceptance, you have not legally accepted their offer and are not obliged to pay anything.
Any lawyers out there care to confirm/deny??

Boods

Also, borderline third line forcing.
 
Top