Should I contest a rise in rent?

[wylie]

I am amazed at how I am being perceived as scheming, evil tenant.

I don't think anybody has called you evil or scheming. Most posters who have answered are just being realistic and helping you out in your particular situation. At least, that is what I was doing.

When you have been here a while longer, you will realise that some threads get a little heated. Not everyone will agree with you, and we obviously don't all agree with each other, but I believe you have been given good advice..... don't rock the boat unless you are prepared to be asked the leave the boat before you are ready.

Don't forget, all of us are landlords and all of us have had "issues" with tenants and their specific "wants" and "needs" before. Our advice was to try to help you by not having your landlord decide you are "difficult" and perhaps ask you leave earlier than you wish to. That would be worse than paying a little more than you want to. After all, it is only for a few months.

Please don't think we are tarring and feathering you.

 

[MissAlison]

Nods. I agree.

I have had quite a few knowledgeable PM's telling me to go for it. Take it to rental review that is.

I would love it if I could move into the 2 year old place (same size) up the road that is up for lease at the moment, for the same price as my current place (with rise). My place is 30 years old, albeit well built, not renovated. Surely you can understand why I would ask the question.

With this advice, which is good advice, I have decided on my plan of action.

 

[the_captain]

I certainly hope your course of action involves signing up for the new cheaper lease and assisting the landlord to find a new tenant that will pay rent at what you were paying.....whilst paying the rental of your previous lease until tenanted. This would be the honest and most ethical pathway.

 

[MissAlison]

No, that's not what I will be doing.

Where is a one eye brow raised, one eye brow lowered emoticon.

 

[jaycee]

Xenia is right.

Infact, I don't know of any insurance cover that would cover/allow the tenant not to be in a lease.

Regards Jo

Mine does.

 

[jaycee]

True!
However if the rules state fixed term OR vacant posession they are the only 2 choices a tenant would have.

and why would the tenant not IGNORE what you wrote and automatically and legally default onto a periodic lease ??

 

[poppy]

Mine does.

All landlord insurance policies that I know of do not cover for rent default unless there is a fixed term lease. If the tenant has gone onto month to month after the fixed term has expired they will still cover for say malicious damage, accidental damage, fire etc. If you were silly enough to let the tenants move in without signing a lease at all, I imagine you would probably have zero coverage.

 

[jaycee]

I certainly hope your course of action involves signing up for the new cheaper lease and assisting the landlord to find a new tenant that will pay rent at what you were paying.....whilst paying the rental of your previous lease until tenanted. This would be the honest and most ethical pathway.

is accepting the lease she is offered a less ethical pathway ? the pm would hold her to conditions of the lease shoudl be she break it, alison hasn;t suggested she would "skip town"

 

[The Y-man]

All landlord insurance policies that I know of do not cover for rent default unless there is a fixed term lease. If the tenant has gone onto month to month after the fixed term has expired they will still cover for say malicious damage, accidental damage, fire etc. .

We use EBM/Rentcover ultra.

http://www.ebminsurance.com.au/cms/...rance/rentcover_ultra/product_disclosure.html

Page 8 of the pds states:
In respect to periodic tenancies, we will only pay the actual rent lost, and not the rent you could have charged for any further period ....

I read that as they do pay for cover of rent default on monthly periodic - and we have claimed on it in the past

Cheers,

The Y-man

 

[The Y-man]

I certainly hope your course of action involves signing up for the new cheaper lease and assisting the landlord to find a new tenant that will pay rent at what you were paying.....whilst paying the rental of your previous lease until tenanted. This would be the honest and most ethical pathway.

Hi Captain,

The way I read it was that her fixed lease is ending. So she is not breaking lease - only needs to give 28 days notice (as long as the 28th day falls on or after the last day of the lease).

Cheers,

The Y-man

 

[MissAlison]

So should I ask for a month to month agreement, or a 9 month lease?

I am in Melbourne.

I know that plenty of renters in Melbourne are on month to month. Will my lease automatically default to this if my LL has no intention of evicting me (I can think of no reason why he would want to get rid of me, apart from some extrinsic reason). Rent is always paid, property is in exactly the same condition as he left it to us.

 

[The Y-man]

Will my lease automatically default to this if my LL has no intention of evicting me (I can think of no reason why he would want to get rid of me, apart from some extrinsic reason). Rent is always paid, property is in exactly the same condition as he left it to us.

Yes. See:
http://www.consumer.vic.gov.au/CA25...nting~&2=20-Landlords~&3=10-Lease+Agreements~

The landlord needs to give a 120 day notice for you to leave with no reason.

Cheers,

The Y-man

 

[Ridin-High]

If you pulled that tribunial s*** on me, i can gurantee you i would be issuing a notice to vacate @ end of lease, then you can enjoy spending money on a hotel until you move into your new house.

Kind Regards,

RH

 

[jaycee]

Yes. See:
http://www.consumer.vic.gov.au/CA25...nting~&2=20-Landlords~&3=10-Lease+Agreements~

The landlord needs to give a 120 day notice for you to leave with no reason.

Cheers,

The Y-man

And ther is nothgin wrong with a 9 month lease, so yo can ask for one if you like too

 

[MissAlison]

Ta,

Well if they are wanting us to move on, I'd be getting a notice right about now. I suppose they intend on keeping me.

 

[the_captain]

Miss,

It's no big deal, so long as you are upfront and honest and dont intend to screw your landlord, just ask for a 9 month lease......in fact it will probably be easier to stay on a month to month. If you pay on time in full, and dont trash the place, as a landlord I could care less. I have had many tenants on month to month for many years. If you were on a month to month and left after 9 months, then thats my issue as your landlord.

If your lease is ending and you can move into the same place for less rent, then do that.......dont screw your landlord and take the VCAT option. If you go the VCAT route to have your rent reduced, well your nothing but a deadbeat tenant IMHO.

One day, I hope you will have an investment property and you can see how stupid your initial comments were. I stand by my original posts, none of them were tongue in cheek, hence no emoticons. They were all serious. I am running a business and do not take kindly to any such shenanigans.

 

[MissAlison]

The only stupid question is the one that is not asked. I don't think I am stupid for wondering, and asking those who are more knowledgeable at managing properties than I.

There will always be a LL and tenants winging on both sides. That's life.

Miss,

It's no big deal, so long as you are upfront and honest and dont intend to screw your landlord, just ask for a 9 month lease......in fact it will probably be easier to stay on a month to month. If you pay on time in full, and dont trash the place, as a landlord I could care less. I have had many tenants on month to month for many years. If you were on a month to month and left after 9 months, then thats my issue as your landlord.

If your lease is ending and you can move into the same place for less rent, then do that.......dont screw your landlord and take the VCAT option. If you go the VCAT route to have your rent reduced, well your nothing but a deadbeat tenant IMHO.

One day, I hope you will have an investment property and you can see how stupid your initial comments were. I stand by my original posts, none of them were tongue in cheek, hence no emoticons. They were all serious. I am running a business and do not take kindly to any such shenanigans.

 

[redwing]

We use EBM/Rentcover ultra.

http://www.ebminsurance.com.au/cms/...rance/rentcover_ultra/product_disclosure.html

Page 8 of the pds states:
In respect to periodic tenancies, we will only pay the actual rent lost, and not the rent you could have charged for any further period ....

I read that as they do pay for cover of rent default on monthly periodic - and we have claimed on it in the past

Cheers,

The Y-man

H YMan

Just a thought with the LL Insurance

1. If you have a tenant who is on a twelve month lease and skips out at month three (leaving nine months on the lease)

2. OR you have a situation where the tenant finishes their twelve month lease, does not sign up again (paperwork not returned signed, not returning calls, lazy PM etc) and automatically goes to monthly (periodic) by default, then skips in Month one

How does that affect the maximum you can claim for rent loss?

I know different policies have different max periods, but just curious as to how each scenario would play out

How did you go when the tenant was on monthly and claimed?

 

[Collector]

All landlord insurance policies that I know of do not cover for rent default unless there is a fixed term lease. If the tenant has gone onto month to month after the fixed term has expired they will still cover for say malicious damage, accidental damage, fire etc. If you were silly enough to let the tenants move in without signing a lease at all, I imagine you would probably have zero coverage.

I totally disagree with this comment.

Unless all the insurance companys have suddenly changed to rules you can certainly claim for rental default regardless of the lease being in the fixed period phase or the continuational phase.

As a PM for 10 years I have not yet come across a policy that does not cover rent default because of the expiration of the fixed period.

 

[The Y-man]

1. If you have a tenant who is on a twelve month lease and skips out at month three (leaving nine months on the lease)

2. OR you have a situation where the tenant finishes their twelve month lease, does not sign up again (paperwork not returned signed, not returning calls, lazy PM etc) and automatically goes to monthly (periodic) by default, then skips in Month one

How does that affect the maximum you can claim for rent loss?

I'm no expert on this, but my understanding is that if the tenant just plain absconded during the month they had already paid for, you can't claim (as they were technically up to date).

If on the other hand they were 3 months behind then did a runner, you could claim the 3 months shortfall.

You can't claim for the remaining none mnths of lease (i.e. no difference whether tenant was on monthly or fixed lease)

How did you go when the tenant was on monthly and claimed?

In one case, the monthly tenants were already a few months behind, then trashed the joint. We got a decent payout for painting, carpet, and rent loss. We couldn't claim for the 2 fireplace inserts that were stolen - they recommended us to claim through our building insurance.

Cheers,

The Y-man