the unbelievable gall of some ex-tenants

sheesh - this is an old thread.

i think it was law and IT ... i've definately moved on and invest differently thanks to these learning experiences.
 
i'm so p*ssed.

had tribunal today. we were forced into mediation again and the ex-tenants sat their like smug little piles of poop who hadn't done a thing wrong. they basically called myself, pm, the carpet layer and the neighbour all liars.

next time definately goes to the judge.

i am so furious. i'm not even asking the full replacement cost of the carpet. i had to recarpet the entire house as putting in new carpet against worn stuff would've look rubbish in a near new dwelling - all i'm asking is that they pay the cost for the rooms that were damaged beyond repair less depreciation, yet they are refusing to pay even that.

they were denying that they ever had a party (yeah right - 4 male uni students!). they claimed that the photographic proof could've been taken anywhere (what the?). they do admit there were permanent stains, but in only half the number of rooms that there actually were ...

grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr :mad:

uumm maybe if you'd been reasonable from the start and just asked for money for the damaged rooms less depreciation you wouldn't be in this situation.... . . . .
 
There you go again Beebop....misquoting just to get a bite and basically being a smart ****.

Read the quote....she does only want compensation for the rooms damaged you idiot...!

When will the mods on here do something about this troll...???
 
they then claimed that only two rooms were soiled and they should only have to pay for those. the two "worst" rooms were the very large open plan living/dining, the stairs and the large open plan family area - 2/3rds of the house - but all the rooms were in poor condition with staining, and it would have looked really cr@p if we'd only replaced the carpet in the "worst" rooms.

.
Pretty sure that implies she wanted them to carpet the entire house..

So initially, she wanted them to pay to carpet the entire house - when she was about to sell. Apologies if this is not the case, but the law says that you are not allowed to seek damages to improve the property, so you probably would get laughed out of court for that one.

I think sometimes landlords can be as bad as their tenants :eek: Nice try on getting free carpet for the sale though, wonder what the tribunal said.
 
You ever had dealings with the tribunal Beebop?

Nah. Never.

Friend had though. Landlord had some truly unbelievable demands (house was a dump to start with) which the tribunal mostly dismissed. Apparently (I wasn't there) they seemed to be very pro-landlord.

The landlord claimed some huge amount of money, got $900 of the tenants bond instead. Private rental. Moral of story, take lots of pictures.
 
Nah. Never.

Friend had though. Landlord had some truly unbelievable demands (house was a dump to start with) which the tribunal mostly dismissed. Apparently (I wasn't there) they seemed to be very pro-landlord. The landlord claimed some huge amount of money, got $900 of the tenants bond instead. Private rental. Moral of story, take lots of pictures

Lucky you (for not ever having been in front of a tribunal) not nice experience for anyone.

If the place your friend rented was such "a dump to start with" why take up the lease in the first place??? :eek:

"Pro-landlords" really? :confused: Is that during their peak season, or on certain days, because goodness knows, it's NEVER been my experience (as a landlord/lady) even with a massive pile of paperwork AND date-stamped photos (before and after) tenant occupany; I still got shafted!!! :mad:
 
bop is on my ignore list, so not sure what exactly was said - but - if you bothered to read the whole thread. but to restate:

the house was brand new - never lived in before - rented to tenants in pristine conditions - after lease expired i was worried about the extent of damage that appeared to be happening and asked them to move on - the carpet in every single room (this was a double story 4bed/2living house) had liquor, vomit and god knows what stains on it that would not come out even with a professional clean. we only claimed the worst four rooms (including the two living rooms) for compensation as the others were oooooookay.

it wasn't even up to rentability standard, let alone sell.

i even had to clean foot and handprints off the 3m cleanings!

in order to restore the house to reasonable condition the entire carpet had to be replaced at a cost of $8,000.

somehow i think this extended the definition of "fair wear and tear".
 
bop is on my ignore list, so not sure what exactly was said - but - if you bothered to read the whole thread. but to restate:

the house was brand new - never lived in before - rented to tenants in pristine conditions - after lease expired i was worried about the extent of damage that appeared to be happening and asked them to move on - the carpet in every single room (this was a double story 4bed/2living house) had liquor, vomit and god knows what stains on it that would not come out even with a professional clean. we only claimed the worst four rooms (including the two living rooms) for compensation as the others were oooooookay.

it wasn't even up to rentability standard, let alone sell.

i even had to clean foot and handprints off the 3m cleanings!

in order to restore the house to reasonable condition the entire carpet had to be replaced at a cost of $8,000.

somehow i think this extended the definition of "fair wear and tear".
Lizzie, don't worry about comments from someone who has never owned property let alone having it trashed by tenants from hell (as you did here). Maybe one day they too will have the (dis)pleasure of human vermen coming in and totally demolishing all that they've worked hard to build up only to appear before the tribunal; let's see how "pro-landlord" they think the tribunal is then!!!
 
I think it is very pro-landlord but fair to the tenants who are vulnerable to the claims of landlords.

For example, single coffee stain on carpet, is professionally cleaned, mostly removed, leaves only a small mark. Landlord will claim $10,000 to have the entire house re-carpeted and will never get it done, simply pocketing the money.
 
I think it is very pro-landlord but fair to the tenants who are vulnerable to the claims of landlords.
Anyone who has ever had to face the tribunal as landlord/lady will probably beg to differ on this point, however that's not to say that EVERY case that goes before the court is in favour of one party of the other.
 
I think it is very pro-landlord but fair to the tenants who are vulnerable to the claims of landlords.

For example, single coffee stain on carpet, is professionally cleaned, mostly removed, leaves only a small mark. Landlord will claim $10,000 to have the entire house re-carpeted and will never get it done, simply pocketing the money.

Is that example real or the sort of thing you beleive only ?

If you rent something and damage it, yuo ahve to pay for it, it's pretty clear from the beginning.
 
Back
Top