Checkout the suggested changes to the act and have your say.
A.
http://www.rta.qld.gov.au/Resources...tter/October-November-2012/Review-of-the-Act?
A.
http://www.rta.qld.gov.au/Resources...tter/October-November-2012/Review-of-the-Act?
Review of QLD RTA Act
- Thread starter ozsupra
- Start date
you are correct and you will never be allowed to charge the access and sewage charges. was at the RTA meeting yesterday and they really didn't want to talk about the water issues. but said make sure you have the 3.5 star rating and proof that you have it. Photos of the water meters when the tenants move in.
but are still getting a lot of people calling them about it
... "never" is a long time
.If these charges can be charged by landlords in other states (as seems to be the case) then one day things might change here in Queensland.
Have not read the suggested changes in any great detail as yet. This one is a biggie and I do feel is an overkill. Of course with the lastest collaspe of the set of stair in Qld will only add fuel to getting this implimented with wider powers.
If its as been in the print media should be inspected the same as smoke alarms this could be a big cost impost to landloards if implimented this way.
Brian
http://www.couriermail.com.au/reale...te-for-landlords/story-fndbodwg-1226509147552
At least no one died in the stair collapse, a child's death is game changing. Won't someone think of the children.
LLs currently have a legal obligation to provide a safe home. The proposed laws will do jack, a slumlord will find a way round them.
As it currently stands B&P reports are designed to tell a potential purchaser whether the home is a long term good thing, not whether there are risks of injury at the place. The guidelines will need to change, or many places will fail a B&P. As it currently stands building reports, are just that, a report. This proposal would require a pass/fail, leading to even more conservative reports.
If a LL requires a report at the start of every tenancy, that could mean two a year. 1k pa - passed onto the tenant.
I know some of the school mums who were at the end of year break up in Brisbane a few years ago, when the deck collapsed. My friend broke her back and one mother died that day.
Another friend had just stepped back into the house off the deck moments before it collapsed. The newspaper reports said the house had been extensively renovated.
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...ool-for-injuries/story-e6freoof-1226359384866
I would be happy to have any decks (including the one we use in our own PPOR) checked every ten years, but annual checking seems like overkill. I'm thinking lots of decks are old and rickety but in this case, the house was checked prior to purchase (but I'm not sure if the deck that collapsed was part of the house that was not altered or part of the renovation.)
The newspaper report says the mothers are suing the school, the builder and the building inspection service from when the owner bought the house.
Where do you stop with the inspections? The house behind us was in the midst of having the floors sanded when the floor sanding machine fell through a termite damaged floor. Luckily nobody was under the house. If a landlord doesn't have annual pest checks and a tenant's piano falls through the floor, who would be sued... the landlord for not having the boards checked, the pest chap who last checked...?
And what stops landlords who don't give a toss from continuing to rent out slums. It happens regularly enough to hit the news?
Landlords who don't have smoke detectors installed would (I guess) be sued in the event of a death in a fire. But knowing that, there are no doubt thousands of landlords (and owner/occupiers) who haven't bothered to pay to have their houses checked and/or smoke alarms installed as per the law.
I just think if common sense and a sense of responsibility from someone who owns a house with a dodgy deck (bad wiring, no safety switch etc etc) haven't made them fix it, and even knowing the law will come down hard on them should something bad happen, that legislation will not make a difference.
Another friend had just stepped back into the house off the deck moments before it collapsed. The newspaper reports said the house had been extensively renovated.
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...ool-for-injuries/story-e6freoof-1226359384866
I would be happy to have any decks (including the one we use in our own PPOR) checked every ten years, but annual checking seems like overkill. I'm thinking lots of decks are old and rickety but in this case, the house was checked prior to purchase (but I'm not sure if the deck that collapsed was part of the house that was not altered or part of the renovation.)
The newspaper report says the mothers are suing the school, the builder and the building inspection service from when the owner bought the house.
Where do you stop with the inspections? The house behind us was in the midst of having the floors sanded when the floor sanding machine fell through a termite damaged floor. Luckily nobody was under the house. If a landlord doesn't have annual pest checks and a tenant's piano falls through the floor, who would be sued... the landlord for not having the boards checked, the pest chap who last checked...?
And what stops landlords who don't give a toss from continuing to rent out slums. It happens regularly enough to hit the news?
Landlords who don't have smoke detectors installed would (I guess) be sued in the event of a death in a fire. But knowing that, there are no doubt thousands of landlords (and owner/occupiers) who haven't bothered to pay to have their houses checked and/or smoke alarms installed as per the law.
I just think if common sense and a sense of responsibility from someone who owns a house with a dodgy deck (bad wiring, no safety switch etc etc) haven't made them fix it, and even knowing the law will come down hard on them should something bad happen, that legislation will not make a difference.
Safety is for all end users and the death of the people in the deck collaspes and now the injuries in the collaspe of the stairs, pleased no one was seriously hurt in this.
I agree their needs to be change in relation to inspections decks, stairs etc however where does it stop. I don't hear to much about increased inspections on highrise buildings where someone have fallen of the railing.
If an inspector is given the powers of pass and fail I can see insurance going through the roof an thus the cost of inspections. Also what will class as a pass or a fail? I can bet there will be more fails than passes even for the very minor issue and of course this will be an increased cost as reinspection will be a added cost and then there is non compliance as there is with pools.
If inspection ARE compulory I bet the cost of inspections will increase.
Again I agree with change however serious control on any knee jerk action is also needed.
Is this also just for rented properties or all properties one in all in I can see inspections similar to pools being put in place or worse.
Now for the stair collaspe the person who put these stairs in is in serious trouble and I hope his insurance is PAID UP. Incorrectly/poorly constructed I will be interested in the final report when released. I can see all his work being checked.
Brian
Had a read of this today and as ED has indicated is vague
OPTION 1.25a Amend the Act to require initial or periodic inspections of rental proprties.
OPTION 1.25b Amend the Act to require the lessor/agent to provide copies of property inspection reports, for example pest inspections and building certifications, to the tenant or prospective tenant on request.
Option 1.25a is vague - what do they mean by "initial" is to mean at the start of each new tenant and say every 3 years after that? this I feel needs to be set out so there is NO mistake what is meant.
Option 1.25b again vague - Property Inspection Reports are one thing building certification is totally different and if certification is whats going to be required this will be a serious cost impost as this will not be a $350 - $500 Property Report it will be more like $800 - $1200 for certification I would hope this will not be required at each change of tenant.
I can see down the track landlords will also need electrical safety certificate - gas installation certificate etc etc before a place can be rented.
Common sense (not hopeful) will be needed here and in the current wording of the options is wide open for interpretation and if implimented in the current form I can see landlords having to fork out huge $$$.
Passing the cost onto tenants will not be possible in a lot of cases.
Brian
