What if something went wrong with the place that makes it uninhabitable, perhaps the electricity goes off, or the front and back doors fall off
Or sqatters move in whilst she is at work
The Tribunal Sucks
- Thread starter skater
- Start date
Or sqatters move in whilst she is at work
muzz - do you own any real estate. what makes you think a tenant has the right to "steal" money off skater.
that's right - stealing - by taking something that belongs to someone else and not paying the agreed contract price for it. it is no different from stealing from a shop or refusing to pay a contractor who has done work for you.
please explain how, in any way, that is justifiable in your mind and makes it right.
i have just been thru a tribunal situation where the tenants ruined my brand new carpet - thru the entire house - but because they lied their butts off they were only ordered to pay for 1/3 of the replacement cost.
so, they basically stole from me by not having to pay for replacing something that belonged to me, which they chose to destroy - so i can full understand skaters complete frustration.
i will cry skater a river - because the tribunal system totally sucks.
I heard this tactic work..
Go and get interpreter..
You: "Hello, can you please interpret this?"
Interpreter: "Sure.."
You: Get out of my house in two weeks, or bad things will start to happen."
Interpreter: whheeys hurght dsaf fasf fsadf uhgtd.
End of conversation....
This will work...guaranteed...too many chances have already been given to this person...
Go and get interpreter..
You: "Hello, can you please interpret this?"
Interpreter: "Sure.."
You: Get out of my house in two weeks, or bad things will start to happen."
Interpreter: whheeys hurght dsaf fasf fsadf uhgtd.
End of conversation....
This will work...guaranteed...too many chances have already been given to this person...
Hi Dazz,
I'm the other half and personally I agree with you, putting up the rent regardless of whether it's in line with the current market is likely to look like revenge and be frowned upon by the tribunal. Clearly they have no grasp of reality and what difficulties landlords face.
The tenant is living is a house larger than required and could find cheaper more suitably sized accommodation. They are behind in rent and continue to go backward.
You ask where is the logic is in raising the rent to market rates, I ask where is the logic in the tribunal reinforcing a current agreement to pay which is already in default?
I think the rent should stay as it is and the next time they default (which shouldn't be too long) Skater should attend the tribunal and breakdown about how we are unable to meet the mortgage repayments with such large shortfalls. Maybe if the tribunal can see a human face instead of a landlord justice may be served.
Regards
Andrew
G'day Andrew,
Looks like you've got a problem here mate.
Agreed.....but I suspect this may have something to do with their (the magistrate's) background. The whole tribunal (even though I've never been to one) from what people have mentioned on here, seems to reek of tenant union advocates and upholding tenant's right of tenure and their right to privacy.....in the face of not performing their obligated responsibility of paying the contracted rent.
I gather this one is your opinion only and the Tenant doesn't quite agree with you on this.
Looks like this aspect is indisputable. Did your PM enquire directly to the magistrate for guidance as to how many times they were allowed to fall behind before the situation became untenable.
Fair enough too.....did your PM ask this question of the magistrate ??
What about all of the fluffy private stuff.....you know, Xmas, single mother....low income, kids expensive etc etc etc. Was that what consumed most of the meeting, or was it simply facts and dates ??
Agreed. I think this is the best course of action.
Agreed. Turn on the waterworks and see what happens. It appears most of this tribunal stuff is all show and emotion with little regard for hard business objectives and contractual obligations.
I wouldn't mention this. It appears that sensible logical business concenrs play no part in the Tribunal's decision.
Agreed, and hopefully swiftly for your business' sake.
Good luck Andrew and Skater. No-one deserves treatment like this.
Looks like you've got a problem here mate.
Agreed.....but I suspect this may have something to do with their (the magistrate's) background. The whole tribunal (even though I've never been to one) from what people have mentioned on here, seems to reek of tenant union advocates and upholding tenant's right of tenure and their right to privacy.....in the face of not performing their obligated responsibility of paying the contracted rent.
I gather this one is your opinion only and the Tenant doesn't quite agree with you on this.
Looks like this aspect is indisputable. Did your PM enquire directly to the magistrate for guidance as to how many times they were allowed to fall behind before the situation became untenable.
Fair enough too.....did your PM ask this question of the magistrate ??
What about all of the fluffy private stuff.....you know, Xmas, single mother....low income, kids expensive etc etc etc. Was that what consumed most of the meeting, or was it simply facts and dates ??
Agreed. I think this is the best course of action.
Agreed. Turn on the waterworks and see what happens. It appears most of this tribunal stuff is all show and emotion with little regard for hard business objectives and contractual obligations.
I wouldn't mention this. It appears that sensible logical business concenrs play no part in the Tribunal's decision.
Agreed, and hopefully swiftly for your business' sake.
Good luck Andrew and Skater. No-one deserves treatment like this.
Yep! I know & I don't care.
Not opinion, fact. Large 3 bedroom house, with Granny Flat (which they don't even use as they store their crap in there). They could get a 3 bedder for $220, mine is $235 rising to $255. Oh, & it will still be below market, but I thought the tribunal might not like it if I raised it any higher than $30.
I don't think that will work, besides if the rent is officially $30pw more, when they finally do leave we can claim that on the insurance, so even if it takes another 6 months we are not out of pocket.
Hahaha, well my PM is a real gem. Usually she goes in with facts, figures, dates, & all her paperwork is immaculate. But she tried a new tact this time. She was all business but she added her own spin. The Landlords are in a financial crisis. They have children, their mortgage has gone up significantly, they can't make the repayments, their children are the ones suffering etc. etc. etc. Two can play at that game. Problem is the property is in a Trust, so it is not personal names on the lease.
Maybe those squatters could be Skater & Bargain HunterOr sqatters move in whilst she is at work
.In all seriousness Skater, I hope this works out for you. Haven't been in this situation (touch wood) but can imagine it's one of those annoying problems that you just want to go away so you can move on.
All the best.
Regards
Marty
Thats a ridiculous comment Muzz22. I am glad you are banned and please don't dare to come back...you are not welcome anymore
Just remembered, I've got another one, that I am having a little trouble with.
She is paying $20pw extra, but it is taking too long, so we went back to the tribunal to try for more. This one has only just had another baby. When the original orders were given, she was supposed to pay $20pw until the baby was born & catch the remaining arrears up when she got the baby bonus.
Of course, that didn't happen, so back to the tribunal. Their ruling this time was that she could only afford $20pw, & didn't have to make a lump sum, because one of her other children is quite sick.
Since she is on welfare, I'd like to know what that has to do with paying their rent. They get all their medical for either free or low cost, so there is plenty of that baby bonus for all.
Just remembered, I've got another one, that I am having a little trouble with.
She is paying $20pw extra, but it is taking too long, so we went back to the tribunal to try for more. This one has only just had another baby. When the original orders were given, she was supposed to pay $20pw until the baby was born & catch the remaining arrears up when she got the baby bonus.
Of course, that didn't happen, so back to the tribunal. Their ruling this time was that she could only afford $20pw, & didn't have to make a lump sum, because one of her other children is quite sick.
Since she is on welfare, I'd like to know what that has to do with paying their rent. They get all their medical for either free or low cost, so there is plenty of that baby bonus for all.
Now thats just a Bad Luck...twice the trouble
Was she on welfare when she first moved in?
How did your PM not filter her out as a prospective tenant, or you fail to veto her, if she was on welfare back then?
There are a lot on welfare in my neck of the woods. Some of them are great tenants. Some suck! In fact one of my best tenants is on welfare & has been for the 4+ years she has been renting my IP. Others that have earnt realatively high salaries have been defaulters. If they can show a stable rental history, then being on welfare is fine. It is, after all, a tiny 3 bedder in Western Sydney.
I thought you said it is too big for her...
Watch out you might witness a domestic here. Love you Honey.
I thought you said it is too big for her...
Watch out you might witness a domestic here. Love you Honey.
HaHaHa, very funny. If you read it, you would have known that the comment was for the second IP, the one behind us.
Sheesh, men!!!!
Hi Skater
Keep the pressure up, stick to the rules and you'll get rid of this tenant soon enough. Its frustrating for you now, but the tenant will know that she's there on borrowed time. Try not to rent to losers & anyone without rental references.
Cheers, Fiona
Keep the pressure up, stick to the rules and you'll get rid of this tenant soon enough. Its frustrating for you now, but the tenant will know that she's there on borrowed time. Try not to rent to losers & anyone without rental references.
Cheers, Fiona
Hi Skater, this is a horrible situation to be in. The attitude of the various tribunals around the country never ceases to amaze me. I just don't understand how they can be so biased. Compared to the Small Claims Tribunals, they look like criminals. I just can't see where the decisions they make are in any way fair and just.
I agree with your hardline approach. You have been fair and reasonable to date. I'd be with another poster here, who would ask for vacant possession, telling them you wanted the property for your own use. I'm sure there must be a way around the Trust issue.
Is it possible to ask for vacant possesion, stating that you are selling? And then change your mind about selling?
I agree with your hardline approach. You have been fair and reasonable to date. I'd be with another poster here, who would ask for vacant possession, telling them you wanted the property for your own use. I'm sure there must be a way around the Trust issue.
Is it possible to ask for vacant possesion, stating that you are selling? And then change your mind about selling?
Last edited:
Similar threads
