Tenants with Multiple DOGS

[Brady]

Would like to get peoples opinions of best method of approach.

Property Elizabeth East SA paying $255 p/w always on time, been there for >2years now, minimal maintenance issues.

PM has advised that number of dogs on the property has increased, there is now 6 large dogs on the property in the backyard. Council Reg is max 2 dogs without council permission. Tenant has stated that not all dogs are theirs, that they have been looking after friends dog... acceptable excuse but it's been reasonable amount of month now, still alll there.

Should I push the matter any further?

They're paying on time and not damaging the property, they're kept in the large yard.

Am I at risk of being liable as I was aware? I assume not as not my dogs. Maybe worth sending formal letter from the PM advising of being aware and please ensure registered etc with council?

 

[tobe]

ring the council and ask if you have any liability. Other than that Id leave them be, its up to them to abide by council bylaws.

 

[pinkboy]

When they vacate, just make sure you don't 'inherit' any dogs!


pinkboy

 

[jim1964]

The dogs are probably protecting the shed contents................if ya know what i mean.

 

[Mr. Fabulous]

The dogs are probably protecting the shed contents................if ya know what i mean.

Totes. Power tools, etc. are very expensive.

 

[Brady]

The dogs are probably protecting the shed contents................if ya know what i mean.

Had issues with this on Highbury property, except it wasn't the shed it was the entire house!

This sparked me to look through the PM inspections for Elizabeth, last two times at the property they haven't accessed the shed due to the dogs. Last time shed was inspected was July 2014 so not too long ago. Will ensure the PM gets into the shed next inspection

 

[Scott No Mates]

Totes. Power tools, etc. are very expensive.

So are the specialised lighting system, tarps, reflectors, watering units etc

 

[datto]

Tomatoes perhaps?

Check for a pair of runners on the power lines at the front lol

 

[Jamie M]

If you're not liable, they've been consistently paying on time and haven't done any damage to the property then I'd just let it be.

That's a ***** load of dogs though!

Cheers

Jamie

 

[skater]

Like others have said, if they keep the home in good condition & pay rent on time, I'd let them be.

We once had a tenant that had eight dogs. They were mostly kept in cages and were show dogs. Some of them were leased. I don't know who would lease a dog, or why you'd want to, but apparently it happens in the 'show' world.

The rent was always on time, the home was very well looked after, and the dogs didn't make much noise, and were in tip top condition.

 

[jim_88]

Are the dogs allowed inside? Could be a problem there...

 

[Brady]

I don't believe the dogs are going inside, they're 6 large dogs. The property isn't that big 3bedroom 1bathroom open living/dining/kitchen. PM had them sign a specific argreement for pet damage which covers excess damage due to pets.

I think best to try keep these tenants, I like tenants having pets. They're IMO less likely to want to leave. This property will be demolished in 3-5 years time once the maintenance gets too much or struggle with tenants. Right now the end figure $$ don't stack up for me to start (although I'm hearing its getting closer) so for now I'll sit on my 7.5% yield on purchase price and hold.

 

[redwing]

Tomatoes perhaps?

Check for a pair of runners on the power lines at the front lol

All the eco criminals use solar now

 

[Sean M]

As long as the agent takes lots of photos and you cant see any damage should really be an issue I don't think. Probably a good idea to check with Council if your liable as a landlord but I don't think you would be. Maybe they are doing a dog sitting business?

 

[Brady]

As long as the agent takes lots of photos and you cant see any damage should really be an issue I don't think. Probably a good idea to check with Council if your liable as a landlord but I don't think you would be. Maybe they are doing a dog sitting business?

Emailed the PM yesterday to confirm with council that we're not liable.

My thought was the same that they're picking up few extra $$$ by looking after some dogs.

 

[Mr. Fabulous]

They were mostly kept in cages...

...and were in tip top condition.

No they weren't.

 

[innerbath]

I think its a good idea to ring council and take advice as you do not want to do this after someone or neighbours make a complaint.

 

[Pete Ramoza]

I'd say just leave them be, but make sure the PM makes a thorough inspection of the entire property.

 

[skater]

No they weren't.

Well......you don't know what you are talking about.

Yes, they were in cages, but they weren't small. The tenant had built, at their cost, large runs for each of them. They were regularly walked, groomed, and fed only the best quality food.

Come to think of it, maybe the cages were a part of the leasing agreement. There were two that were given the run of the yard & they were their pets. One was an aged show dog, now retired, the other just a young one. Not sure about it.

 

[Mr. Fabulous]

Well......you don't know what you are talking about.

Alright. So let's go down this path: If the dogs could talk, are you absolutely 100% certain they would say they were in tip top condition? Have you ever met or come across anyone, anywhere, ever who had lived in a cage who would have described themselves as being in 'tip top condition'?

I didn't think so.

You know what they call 'large runs' that are built for humans? Prisons.