Unrealistic expectations?

[s_t]

We've been looking for a place to rent over the last few weeks, and my opinion on most PM's I've come across isn't very high! Not sure If I'm being unrealistic, or if most are just slack

Take this exchange today for example. My email to them:


Hello xxxxxx & yyyyy,

As co-directors of xxxxxxxx Beenleigh / Shailer Park I thought you might like a heads-up about some inefficiencies in your property management division as observed from a potential rental customer perspective. I've also owned an IP (and hired property managers), so understand both sides.

You've a rental property,xxxxxxxxx St Cornubia, already vacant and listed as available for rent tomorrow (13/09). I am hoping to move into a property this weekend, but to do so will need an application finalised by tomorrow, in which case the property would need to be viewed this evening (external inspection done yesterday). Otherwise we'll be looking to move a week later. Both your reception staff and myself have been friendly/polite to each other, but they seem in no hurry to organise inspections (she did take name and ph. number for inspection to be organised later). I suspect if they were the property owner themselves, the apparent likely loss of a week's rent would suddenly matter a lot more to them! Information flow is also hampered by no designated manager for that property (eg. a question on maintenance of part of the 1.5 acres couldn't be answered with any certainty).

I hope this feedback is of use to you.


There response:

Dear xxxxxxx,

Thank you for your email outlining your concerns. Feedback , negative or positive is always welcome in this office and I will endeavour to answer all your concerns.

We have a policy in this office, to try not to have inspections on the property until after the tenant has vacated and the final vacate has been done.

We understand under the act we can issue an entry notice and take people through, however, in most cases they do refuse us entry. Tenants have packed boxes etc everywhere and they do not want people to see the property in that state, also if someone falls or trips over anything then there is a liability issue. Tenants also want the space to clean and move in peace.

In all the years I have been doing this job, this has never been an issue and in fact works very well for all parties.

The keys were handed in to the office late yesterday afternoon and the lass that is doing the vacate was in court this morning, and is actually doing the final inspection now. If more cleaning or repairs need doing, then, as I’m sure you are aware, we have to give them the opportunity to go back and rectify, this is why we try to have a week’s grace from the vacate date, before anyone moves in. I’m sure you would not want to move into a property that needed attention from the last tenant.

All our owners are aware of this as we do not hide anything from them and they are quite happy to work it this way, so that the new tenant does move into a clean and habitual property. Most of us here are property owners and do not have a problem with this system.

As for being able to move in this weekend, that would not be possible, as it takes about 48 hours to do all the checks and then we need to put the application to the owner for his or her approval.

Unless it is a small property management office, I think you will find most are now opting out of portfolio and going to task management. Due to all the legislation and paper work involved now this is found to be more efficient for all concerned.

With regard to the property maintenance , the owner does pay for a monthly garden maintenance which is for the trimming of the trees and general tidy up of the property. The lawns are the tenant responsibility. The owner also pays for a monthly pool service, but tenant pays for all chemicals and must maintain the pool during the month.

I hope this helps you understand our situation and you will be called once the property is available to view.



So are most IP owners happy with a deliberate weeks vacancy? Are they being slack or am I just unrealistic?

 

[s_t]

If anyone is looking for a good property manager in the Rochedale South/Daisy Hill/Shailer park areas, I've found (as a prospective tenant) the following two agencies to be proffesional, pro-active and willing to work out suitable inspection times. They seem to have significant experience in the industry, and I imagine they would do a good job in representing the owners interests.

- Integrity Property Management - Rochedale South
- Leisa Dixon Real Estate


I don't understand the attitudes of some other agencies - no flexibility at all. For one place I ended up knocking on the door and the owner took me though! And then there are other mobs that hold inspections at only 10 or 11am? Are they wanting only the unemployed for tenants?

 

[Peter_Tersteeg]

Efficiency is a good thing and nobody wants any vacancy, but I'd be wary of a prospective tenant that wants an immeidate decision without giving the landlord sufficient time to do their checks properly.

 

[saiman]

The other thing is as a tenant you may not know the landlord side of the story in terms of leaving the property a week or however long vacant for various reasons such as minor renovations, and a PM may be reluctant to tell prospective tenants (particularly if they are good) this as it may prompt them to look elsewhere.

 

[matto_]

very difficult to know both sides of the one agency (landlord and tenant). We have had some doosies on both sides.

Sometimes worth doing a bit of "shadow shopping".

 

[jackbak]

The email sounds reasonable but the policy of one weeks vacancy regardless of what condition the property is in sounds a bit slack. If it was my property I would ideally like a tenant move in the next day, obviously this wont happen every time but they shouldn't rule it out completely. If you have tenants on 12 month leases you are loosing 1 weeks rent every single year, while all investors budget for this scenario, in reality we don't want to see it happen.

 

[mattysavager]

The emails seems fairly slack.

We have one property for rent at the moment, we served an entry notice and the tenant burst into hysterics, screaming, crying etc when we came through. We are not doing any further inspections until it becomes vacant, as she is putting people off.

Other than that, we do maximum 3 inspections per week while the tenant is still in place, and most of our properties are rented before the tenant even moves out.

As a PM and landlord, I would never expect a tenant to move in the day after another tenant moves out. As leases are signed in advance, if you signed up a tenant for the day after the vacating date of the outgoing tenant, and it wasn't ready (old tenant failed to vacate, not clean, furniture left etc) then the new tenant can cancel their lease and walk away. Not good.

We always leave 3 working days, unless a property is known to be dirty, and we expect that we will have to claim bond and get in cleaners etc, in which case it can be longer.

In response to the OP - it can be frustrating when a tenant insists on moving in ASAP, having not yet inspected the property; however if the property is vacant, they should be showing you either that day, or the next day if time doesn't allow. They should also have asked you to apply and then you could get tentatively approved so that you're not wasting your time inspecting it. Seems like poor service to me. Renting properties should always be the agency's number one priority.

If our Leasing agent is not available to show properties or double booked, our Principal steps in and does them, and he also does tenant inspections on weekends. It's the most important part of the job.

 

[s_t]

The email sounds reasonable but the policy of one weeks vacancy regardless of what condition the property is in sounds a bit slack. If it was my property I would ideally like a tenant move in the next day, obviously this wont happen every time but they shouldn't rule it out completely. If you have tenants on 12 month leases you are loosing 1 weeks rent every single year, while all investors budget for this scenario, in reality we don't want to see it happen.

Yep, property was vacant (keys handed in) on Tues (11th). Advertisement went up same day (Tues), saying it was available on Thur (13th). If I could have, I would have moved in this Friday (14th). Property is empty and looks fine from what can be seen externally (as of Tues night).

But nup, still waiting on them to organise the first inspection!

Efficiency is a good thing and nobody wants any vacancy, but I'd be wary of a prospective tenant that wants an immeidate decision without giving the landlord sufficient time to do their checks properly.

Not the intention to cut short the checks - I just want to move in! Maybe I'm now classified as a 'difficult' tenant.....

How long do checks take? Employment/Income verification, rental history, TICA? I would have thought these were fairly quick phone calls/checks, but perhaps I'm mistaken. I can supply 4 years of rental ledger and statement from PM. If the required people are hard to get hold of (eg. HR/manager), that would be the major time constraint I imagine.


edit: the availability date in ad has changed to 19/9. Must be something going on with past/existing tenant.

 

[Scott No Mates]

Whilst you can appreciate that the house is vacant and want to move in asap, the PM should be in position to do an outgoing inspection (with the tenant) on the day. If there are issues, you advise then and there.

I have frequently had one to two days max change over on some premises which are in high demand so there is little time to stuff around with waiting for the tenant to arrange a final clean.

As for inspections - the lease allows you to hold an open (some tenants are more obliging than others).

With regards to tenants who are all to keen to take the place site unseen, I am wary - why haven't you arranged a place already (landlord has to give appropriate notice and you won't give notice until you've found something for yourself. Reference checking can take a few hours to a few days but generally doesn't need a week to process.

Personally, if an agency had a policy of leaving a week between tenants, I would be pretty ticked off as you have to factor in a minimum of 2 weeks vacancy 4%+

 

[priscilla]

Whilst it may seem slack to you there are some legitimate reasons why many agencies will not show properties until the tenant has vacated. We have been to many training sessions where this is advised to be the 'best practice' way to do things. The main reason being as an example tenant A hands in their vacating notice to move from the property in 21 days - 7 days out from the expiry of that notice they ring the agency to advise they need a 7 day extension (even if you refuse there is no legal way you can ensure they are vacated by the agreed date). If your Agent has shown the property, approved an application and taken a holding deposit from tenant B during this time and you cannot provide possession to the premises on the agreed day, you are at risk of action through the CTTT (or equivalent) and there are cases that have paid sizable amounts of compensation to tenant B in that situation.

The agent is looking after the Landlord to ensure this does not happen to them even though it does mean a longer vacancy period - this will definitely be cheaper in the long run than the possible alternative.

 

[s_t]

Been a few comments along the lines below. Maybe I've been a little harsh, but I'm still unimpressed. I can see the logic below, but not sure how well it still applies if the keys were already handed in several days ago. Even if repair work or extra cleaning is required, I would have thought it would be logical to take a keen tenant through so that an application and checking process can begin.

In any case, I've moved on - other properties call, and an application is in. Can't wait forever and risk ending up sleeping in the tent! They still have no inspection date organised, though availability in the ad has been changed yet again, to Mon 17th now. Hope for the owners sake they can get it rented out reasonably quickly.

Whilst it may seem slack to you there are some legitimate reasons why many agencies will not show properties until the tenant has vacated. We have been to many training sessions where this is advised to be the 'best practice' way to do things. The main reason being as an example tenant A hands in their vacating notice to move from the property in 21 days - 7 days out from the expiry of that notice they ring the agency to advise they need a 7 day extension (even if you refuse there is no legal way you can ensure they are vacated by the agreed date). If your Agent has shown the property, approved an application and taken a holding deposit from tenant B during this time and you cannot provide possession to the premises on the agreed day, you are at risk of action through the CTTT (or equivalent) and there are cases that have paid sizable amounts of compensation to tenant B in that situation.

The agent is looking after the Landlord to ensure this does not happen to them even though it does mean a longer vacancy period - this will definitely be cheaper in the long run than the possible alternative.

 

[westminster]

From an owner point of view I want more than one applicant The person who wants to move in asap prevents me from being able to advertise for a week and get more applicants. That being said - I would therefore move the available date to be that time in advance. The available date in this instance is too early as no one could move in on that date which they have admitted to.
I am happy to have a week in between vacancies. I want the outgoing tenant out, inspect the place myself and see if it needs any upkeep, let the PM do their inspection and arrange viewings.
In Perth it is now the custom to do a 'home open' for potential tenants and everyone comes at once so there might only be one viewing in a week.

 

[depreciator]

Given there are landlords here who can't even get phone calls returned by their property managers, I reckon that lengthy, considered email response from that agent is pretty impressive. Especially given you are just a prospective tenant. I would give them ten out of ten for communication. It seems perfectly reasonable to me that they need to have a good look at the place after the tenant has moved out and deal with any problems. And they have said that their landlords are accepting of this.

 

[Dazz]

Hello xxxxxx & yyyyy,

As co-directors of xxxxxxxx Beenleigh / Shailer Park I thought you might like a heads-up about some inefficiencies in your property management division as observed from a potential rental customer perspective. I've also owned an IP (and hired property managers), so understand both sides.

Both sides ?? There are three parties involved....Landlord / Agent / Tenant. You're pontificating about the third leg to the stool, and you're a newb at that leg.

I don't think having been a Landlord and Tenant, gives you much of a right to slam both agency Directors in the very first sentence....and accuse them of having inefficiencies in their business model ??

I am hoping to move into a property this weekend, but to do so will need an application finalised by tomorrow, in which case the property would need to be viewed this evening (external inspection done yesterday).

Are they being slack or am I just unrealistic?

I reckon your extreme urgency and totally unrealistic time-frame would set alarm bells ringing with me instantly. You wouldn't be the first applicant to request instant access who then ;

• Complained much later that the Tenancy was filthy when you moved in and therefore you have no obligation to keep it need and clean, in fact the Landlord now owes you money for repairing his dump.
• Didn't have adequate references instantly available to match the very short timeframes insisted and then complained.
• Complained that a proper inspection report wasn't fully documented and signed off by all parties before you being given the keys.

Nope, your rush rush rush timeframe initially given is a big red flag for me.


Wearing both the Landlord's hat and the agency's hat for a moment, you surely must see that your private circumstances creating your very short deadlines has no bearing on either of their processes to ensure that the property is properly attended to with the outgoing Tenant, and both their asset and the business is protected first and foremost, especially considering that they are the ones that cop the majority of the burden of conforming with the onerous laws and regs that bind them.

Your very short deadlines creating this hub-bub don't even rate a mention to the other two parties, despite you thinking that your concerns should rate # 1.


On further reflection, I thought the reply you received from the Agent was very calm and considered. Kudos to them. I was impressed....they could have easily reacted differently to your initial accusation and/or unsolicitored advice about how to run their business.

 

[s_t]

I moved last Friday (21st) into a different property. Applications were put in for 3 houses on Mon 17th and this PM was keen to get the property filled (and yes she did full checks).

Thurs 20th the original property manager called (initial post of this thread) and advised of an inspection, but too late for me. Lots of places around here sitting available for several weeks, and same agency says acerage properties don't have much interest, so will be interesting to see when it does get tenants.

I have no qualms in providing feedback/advise to agency directors, but whether they choose to listen or do anything about it is up to them. Any business that thinks they have no inefficiencies, and doesn't want feedback, is going to struggle. Dazz, you've been careful to selectively quote certain sentances not in their full context, and frame your response around them - you'd make a good journalist

 

[Dazz]

I have no qualms in providing feedback/advise to agency directors, but whether they choose to listen or do anything about it is up to them.

It certainly is. Unsolicitored advice, staggeringly in the form of criticism within the first sentence of a written communication....is unlikely to garner much support from the organisation who never asked for any advice.

You sure know how to get off on the wrong foot. Your attempt at trying to get the upper hand on them in your first sentence certainly back-fired in your attempt to muscle your way into the Tenancy.

Any business that thinks they have no inefficiencies, and doesn't want feedback, is going to struggle.

Can't remember the last time one of the Big 4 Banks asked me for my feedback. I've been relishing to have that opportunity for the past 15 years. I won't hold my breath. They all seem to be doing AOK.

Dazz, you've been careful to selectively quote certain sentances not in their full context, and frame your response around them - you'd make a good journalist

Hey...you asked the question, not me.

Are they being slack or am I just unrealistic?​

I reckon, based on what you wrote, you were being unrealistic....and gave multiple examples, from what you tendered, to back up my opinion.

If you only wanted to hear from people who agreed with you that they were being slack, and their IMO reasonable response to your unrealistic self imposed deadlines.....why did you ask the question ??

 

[s_t]

Your attempt at trying to get the upper hand on them in your first sentence certainly back-fired in your attempt to muscle your way into the Tenancy.

I don't think it had any affect at all....

Can't remember the last time one of the Big 4 Banks asked me for my feedback. I've been relishing to have that opportunity for the past 15 years. I won't hold my breath. They all seem to be doing AOK.

I have been asked, as would have most customers I imagine. Go to there websites and I suspect you'll find an open invitation for feedback ..... Sure the directors mightn't read it but that is due to the size of company.

I reckon, based on what you wrote, you were being unrealistic....and gave multiple examples, from what you tendered, to back up my opinion.

I am hoping to move into a property this weekend, but to do so will need an application finalised by tomorrow, in which case the property would need to be viewed this evening (external inspection done yesterday). Otherwise we'll be looking to move a week later.

Though I requested 3 days till moving, I also offerred them 10 days as per second sentance (which you removed). I thought the 3 days was also in their interests, and I still think 10 days is entirely realistic!

Hey...you asked the question, not me.

Are they being slack or am I just unrealistic?

Yep, and it has been a useful thread, for me anyway, and hopefully for others also. I was certainly optimistic about the likely outcome.

That property could now have good tenants in it now (us ) had the agency decided to play it differently ie. allowed viewing early when property is vacant, even if the owner/tenant had to rectify some things before determining lease commencement. Still would have worked out timewise.

I agree that whilst not willing to be very accomodative, this PM is better than several others I came across. I'm still waiting to hear back regarding inspection times from others

If both parties are keen, it can be done quickly and properly (as per the place we now live in). It does require proactive management though (easier in small business), rather than standardised processes with no deviation attitude (more common in larger businesses).