Replacing Gas Heater with Electric Heaters - is this OK?

I have a 1960's rental property on a good sized block of land. I bought it with the view to knocking it down one day and building two units.
The house is clean and liveable but worn and a bit shabby.
I have a couple with a baby renting it from me for maybe just below market value. They are terrific tenants and made the place look very homely and attractive despite it's age and obvious defects.
In the lounge there is a central gas space heater which until now has worked a treat.
As it was cold last week here in Geelong my tenants tried to use the heater which would not work. I had my plumber have a look at it who after many days of trying to source parts for this 40 something year old heater told me it probably was not worth fixing and if He went ahead it would be costing me over a grand and then what else might go wrong with it????? This is too much for a house that won't be there in a year or two.
My plumber suggested that I install electric wall heaters (of which I have 3 excellent ones stored in my shed) instead. He said he finds landlords in my position often do this instead of fixing these old heaters.
The question is can I replace a Gas heater (which I imagine costs less to run) with electric heaters? Can I expect my tenants to accept this or am I under obligation to replace like for like?
Bear in mind my tenants fixed lease has ended and they are now on a periodic lease. Does this make a difference? If they want to leave as a result of not liking the new heating they only have to give me a month's notice.
Thanks
Brits
 
Hey brits

Ask your PM - and explain it how you have in this thread. I don't think it sounds unreasonable. Worse case scenario - perhaps knock a little bit off the rent (although I realise they're already paying less than market).

Cheers

Jamie
 
I would tell the tenant that like the house, the gas heater is old and the correct parts are no longer available. You could bodgy it up cheaply but this would make it inefficient to use, be expensive to run and could even be dangerous.

I would then tell them that you have decided to upgrade the heating by providing localised heaters in 3 rooms, let them pick the rooms and they can then minimise costs by only heating the rooms they need heated at that time.

As they are good tenants, paying rent on time and looking after the place, you will do all this without increasing the rent :D
 
Thanks Macca and Jamie M
I self manage so have no property manager.
I do not intend to knock anything off the rent but will assure them that there will be no rent increase anytime in 2015 if they want to stay and agree to this heating. I was going to put it up 10 bucks a week not that they knew that but they probably might have guessed I would eventually.
I really just want to install two heaters in the lounge room (which is the only room with heating at present anyway). I really don't want to give them the choice as it is my place and I need to consider what would be best for any renter not just them.
Does the fact that they are on a periodic lease make any difference as to the 'like for like' replacement rule seeing they can give notice at anytime? The other thing is it is Summer so if they really don't like it, heating is not going to be an issue for a long while and they can find somewhere else in the meantime.
I am not concerned about getting new tenants if they are not happy. I'm pretty good at picking them these days and I charge under market value so rent easily.
Regards
Marie
 
Generally reverse cycle air-conditioning is much cheaper to run than resistive electric heaters, and they can cool in summer so better value for tenants.
 
Generally reverse cycle air-conditioning is much cheaper to run than resistive electric heaters, and they can cool in summer so better value for tenants.

Also have the ability to decommission it when you get rid of the house in a few years time if you wish and use in next property. Might be a possible solution, though more than you want to spend (+$1k).
 
Hi

Just tell your tenants it was always your intentions to eventually demolish the house but you were going to do it in a few years time.

But after weighing up the options, if it is going to cost a grand or two to replace the gas heater for a benefit of only 12 to 24 months you may as well start the process now because once one thing breaks down often other things do. This means the tenant will realise that they have to find somewhere else to live...

Say it this way and they will probably tell you to forget about the heater and that they are happy to rent the house as it is, especially if it is under market rental!

Regards,

alicudi
 
I don't think you're quite getting it. You're contractually obligated to maintain the property. If you'd not wanted to do that, you could have written it into the contract as a special condition that certain amenities wouldn't be replaced, or wouldn't be replaced like-for-like, if they broke. But you didn't do that, and you're now stuck with the lease that you made.

You seem to take the view as "well, I'll just breach it, and if they don't like it, they can leave".

Well, no, if you breach it, they can force you to do the maintenance, and would probably be awarded compensation.
 
I don't think you're quite getting it. You're contractually obligated to maintain the property. If you'd not wanted to do that, you could have written it into the contract as a special condition that certain amenities wouldn't be replaced, or wouldn't be replaced like-for-like, if they broke. But you didn't do that, and you're now stuck with the lease that you made.

You seem to take the view as "well, I'll just breach it, and if they don't like it, they can leave".

Well, no, if you breach it, they can force you to do the maintenance, and would probably be awarded compensation.

They do not have a fixed lease so he can give them notice if they dont like it.

That would mean they would be without a heater for the 6 week notice period - during summer.

I dont think the OP is trying to screw them, he just wants to get to a commercial outcome.
 
They do not have a fixed lease so he can give them notice if they dont like it.
If it's on no grounds, yes, but it's *very* important not to present it as, or give it the appearance of being, eviction on the basis that the tenant wanted the maintenance done, is my point.

Regarding a commercial outcome, I understand that, but the landlord had the option to write special conditions into the lease prior to entering into it, to protect themselves from just such a situation.
 
how about install 1 heater in the same room
get them to sign a new lease for 'insurance purposes'

they have a working heater you have a new lease to cover the gas heater going missing, win win.
 
Generally reverse cycle air-conditioning is much cheaper to run than resistive electric heaters, and they can cool in summer so better value for tenants.

If you want savings keeps your gas heater and have ceiling fans. Splittys are the most expensive thing to run in any household.
 
So I emailed my tenants telling them I have been advised by the plumber that the current heater is not worth fixing and could still have more trouble even if he does find the parts etc.
I told them that I would like to instead install electric panel heaters in the lounge. I said I understand that these may cost more to run than the natural gas heater. I said I am happy to get their thoughts on this. I was prepared to negotiate on rent if they had concerns.
They responded to this by saying they think they will look for another place. I actually think they were going to do this anyway. As they have the baby who is now walking I wonder they don't just want a place that's a bit less shabby you know with nice new carpet,no rust stains in the bath and security screen doors.
I'm actually pretty happy with this because I can now put whatever heating I like in. I'll rent it in a flash because it is quite cheap.
Thanks for all the thoughts and advice.
Brits
 
I'm actually pretty happy with this because I can now put whatever heating I like in. I'll rent it in a flash because it is quite cheap.
I'm glad both parties are happy. Don't forget to put in a special condition in the new lease that you do not intend to replace items that are broken like-for-like!

(I don't think you could put in a blanket "no maintenance" condition, as that would contradict the essential minimum conditions, but saying that you won't necessarily replace like-for-like is certainly likely to be reasonable.)
 
I'm glad both parties are happy. Don't forget to put in a special condition in the new lease that you do not intend to replace items that are broken like-for-like!

(I don't think you could put in a blanket "no maintenance" condition, as that would contradict the essential minimum conditions, but saying that you won't necessarily replace like-for-like is certainly likely to be reasonable.)

Yeah thanks Perp that is a great point. I actually did not realise I could do that.
The house also has an air conditioner that works but I'm not sure for how much longer. If it were up to me I'd just remove it but that would leave a big mess.
Is it reasonable to also include in new lease that should air conn fail it will not be repaired or replaced? Bear in mind again that the rent is cheap. I always attend to repairs promptly and correctly. I just really don't want to be up for an air conditioner something I think is a luxury in such an old and simple house.
 
Is it reasonable to also include in new lease that should air conn fail it will not be repaired or replaced?
Provided you don't advertise it as air-conditioned - or specify clearly in advertising "presently has air-conditioning but will not be repaired if it breaks" - then that should be fine.

The basic premise is that unless you've clearly stated otherwise, and the tenant has agreed, then you have to maintain everything that's there when they move in and/or everything that you advertised the property as having.
 
Back
Top