Do you know when this is happening? Something else to add to the list of things to do and take care of.
smoke alarms
- Thread starter camo100
- Start date
Do you know when this is happening? Something else to add to the list of things to do and take care of.
Do you know when this is happening? Something else to add to the list of things to do and take care of.
Unfortunately I don't yet, hope to hear something soon so I know what I will need to arrange!
"Something else to add to the list of things to do and take care of. "
agreed... again, the yield does not generally reflect the risk of this asset class. this is about lawyers expanding their tentacles. this week it's smoke alarms, next week it will be checks that the glass is structurally safe, then trip hazards such as carpet wear, then heavy metals leaching from the water pipes. how many people have asbestos filters on their IP's shower roses?
agreed... again, the yield does not generally reflect the risk of this asset class. this is about lawyers expanding their tentacles. this week it's smoke alarms, next week it will be checks that the glass is structurally safe, then trip hazards such as carpet wear, then heavy metals leaching from the water pipes. how many people have asbestos filters on their IP's shower roses?
I'm in NSW and the PM sends a company around every 12 months to test the smoke alarms, I also do it myself between visits (I'm a renter by the way).
I wouldn't dare disable a smoke alarm, my life is worth more than the small inconvenience of burnt toast setting it off!
I wouldn't dare disable a smoke alarm, my life is worth more than the small inconvenience of burnt toast setting it off!
I have heard that in QLD they want to introduce yearly structural and pest inspections on rental houses. These new inspections together with the smoke alarm inspections are increasing the costs associated with rental properties.
Does the owner absorb these costs or do they eventually push rents up so that the tenant eventually pays?
Does the owner absorb these costs or do they eventually push rents up so that the tenant eventually pays?
Well in the end I would say yes.
There is only so much increase in costs an investor can absorb before they bail out which decreases supply and therfore increases demand for rentals.
Result = rents upskie.
Not a charity.
In saying that, we are able to offer competetive market rents to attract more applications to choose from because we perform all aspects of management which saves us more $$ in the long run. Only because we have the time and inclanation that is.
Right now the high increases in insurance, rates and now the threat of further added costs surely must result in higher rents to cover.
Do you know when this is happening? Something else to add to the list of things to do and take care of.
I have received a letter from my PM stating the change in legislation has occurred and asking me to pay $70 pa per property to outsource the checks.
Has anyone in VIC received a similar request?
JB
Nope, none for me. I'd ask your PM to show you the legislation change.
Not aware of anything new yet either..
we all need to fight back against this nanny state stupidity. And plump civil servants need to realise that landlords are not bottomless pits. every time their wish list gets longer the ATO sees their loss claims grow and everyone wonders why property investors are losing so much??
I fear the easy years have made this country prime breeding ground for inefficiencies we can no longer cover.
I fear the easy years have made this country prime breeding ground for inefficiencies we can no longer cover.
I think for your PM - "change in legislation" = "we only just realised we could get sued for not doing this".
Good luck.
Probably more likely!
FWIW recently there was a house fire in Melbourne, whilst it was the tenants fault the landlord was aware the detectors weren't working, which means the tenant can claim compensation.
I think $80 per year is a reasonable amount to pay for peace of mind, especially if the company you are using has unlimited visits, lisenced electricians and does full testing on the alarms. Plus in the event that there is a fire you're covered as you have maintained the detectors.
Ps. Matt, good to see you back!
I see your point, Lil, but where does it stop ?
In WA we are required to have 2 x RCD's installed also.
In the not too distant future, I can see landlords paying for annual testing of these aswell.
So now, $80 a pop turns into $240 per property. All for pushing a total of 3 test buttons
It has been mentioned before, and I agree, that the "Nanny State" shenanigans really need to be reigned in.
It's about time that the "grown ups" started taking responsibility for their actions, or lack there of.
In WA we are required to have 2 x RCD's installed also.
In the not too distant future, I can see landlords paying for annual testing of these aswell.
So now, $80 a pop turns into $240 per property. All for pushing a total of 3 test buttons
It has been mentioned before, and I agree, that the "Nanny State" shenanigans really need to be reigned in.
It's about time that the "grown ups" started taking responsibility for their actions, or lack there of.
So now, $80 a pop turns into $240 per property. All for pushing a total of 3 test buttons
I have always said this too, but now we have organised our IPs to be signed up for $49 for the first year and (I think) $69 from then on, I'm happy to hand over this job to someone.
I still have to diarise the follow up and email and organise an inspection when we have a tenancy changeover, but the reality is that it is more than pushing three buttons.
I no longer have to cart a ladder over with me when I do an entry condition report. And with a few tenants having left and new ones go in, I kind of like that. I used to scratch the date into the battery as proof of it having been changed on a certain date to coincide with the new tenant going in. Now I have a report to prove it is done.
Mostly, it is peace of mind that there is a level of professional insurance over the whole thing. I was dragged into this kicking and screaming, but (just quietly) I'm happy to have handed this over, especially if a tenant leaves after six months.
Last edited:
I
So now, $80 a pop turns into $240 per property. All for pushing a total of 3 test buttons
I have said this before in another thread but pressing the "test" button is not a accepted method for testing functionality of smoke detectors and RCD. Particularly if your paying for a professional to do it.
For smoke the person should be using can of smoke. The test button only establishes that the battery and sounder are working.
For RCD an external testor plugged into the circuit that does a timed test. A common fault is them still tripping but taking far too long to do so.
Morg, I do see your point and agree that it's becoming far too ridiculous and grown ups need to take responsibility, but the problem is (as mentioned) hitting the test button is simply not enough.
Unfortunately the RTA is very pro tenant so much is put back on the landlord.
Unfortunately the RTA is very pro tenant so much is put back on the landlord.
This doesn't prove it'll work in a fire though, which is the reason the companies test with simulated smoke.
Again, for Vic there isn't any new legislation, so one can assume that tenants are responsible for the change of batteries during their tenancy and are responsible to notify the landlord if they don't work, and that pressing the test button is enough.
It will be interesting to see just what the new legislation says.
For what it's worth the landlord is responsible to ensure smoke detectors are working at the start of a tenancy, which is why I would recommend these companies. As it is a risk that I as a property manager am not willing to take on in the event of a fire.
