VIC- Tenant doesn't want to renew lease
- Thread starter agent007
- Start date
In Victoria, it is quite common for tenants to roll over to a periodic lease (month to month) when their fixed term lease expires.
When a lease becomes periodic, the tenant does not sign a new lease, but must still abide by the rules set out in the original agreement.
Do you have cause to issue a notice to vacate? If not, then 120 days notice is required.
When a lease becomes periodic, the tenant does not sign a new lease, but must still abide by the rules set out in the original agreement.
Do you have cause to issue a notice to vacate? If not, then 120 days notice is required.
Hi there,
A few questions, why do you not wish to keep a tenant on a periodic lease? Is the rent paid on time, and the property looked after?
In Vic you may issue a NTV either 90 days end of lease, or 120 days no reason. However both of these notices can be challenged by the tenant through VCAT and as you cannot force the tenant to sign a new lease, or issue a notice to vacate because they won't sign a lease, it is likely it'll be thrown out at VCAT.
I'd suggest, if you have a good tenant, check your landlord policy (some of the big banks do not cover periodic leases) up the rent if you can and enjoy the return.
Also, don't forget if you evict the tenant you are up for re-letting charges, which depending on the agency and the rent on the property, this is likely to be over $500 which even if you increase the rent $10p/w you've already wiped out that return paying leasing fees and then you have a tenant who you don't know who may have a habit of paying rent late and keeping the property in a poor condition.
If however, the tenant you have is a bad tenant, then that's a different story - but remember if you've offered them a lease, they've knocked it back and then you send a NTV they can easily use this as reason to go to VCAT.
A few questions, why do you not wish to keep a tenant on a periodic lease? Is the rent paid on time, and the property looked after?
In Vic you may issue a NTV either 90 days end of lease, or 120 days no reason. However both of these notices can be challenged by the tenant through VCAT and as you cannot force the tenant to sign a new lease, or issue a notice to vacate because they won't sign a lease, it is likely it'll be thrown out at VCAT.
I'd suggest, if you have a good tenant, check your landlord policy (some of the big banks do not cover periodic leases) up the rent if you can and enjoy the return.
Also, don't forget if you evict the tenant you are up for re-letting charges, which depending on the agency and the rent on the property, this is likely to be over $500 which even if you increase the rent $10p/w you've already wiped out that return paying leasing fees and then you have a tenant who you don't know who may have a habit of paying rent late and keeping the property in a poor condition.
If however, the tenant you have is a bad tenant, then that's a different story - but remember if you've offered them a lease, they've knocked it back and then you send a NTV they can easily use this as reason to go to VCAT.
If tenant can't or won't renew a lease, then issue a notice to vacate. I have had this problem in the past and have resolved it by instructing my Vic PM to issue notices to vacate. It then forces the tenant's hand.
Choice can then be with tenant to either re-sign or vacate.
Nothing worse than having tenant end lease just prior to Xmas.
Thank you all for your prompt answers!
this is what I dont get,
regardless of whether the tenant refused to sign a lease or not,
why do they have a right to even dispute what the owner wants to do with it!!!
if they are at the end of the lease, and provided you give them the adequate notice, whether I decide to get them to leave because I got out of the wrong side of the bed or because my next door neighbours gold fish told me to, it should be my decision and my choice, since its my property!
I agree, but unfortunately unless the law is changed the tenant can dispute almost anything...
How can a tenant dispute a "no grounds" termination notice if they refused to sign up to a fixed term tenancy?
Pardon my french, but that **** would not fly here in WA.
Because the notice is a "no reason" notice to vacate and if the tenant can demonstrate that there is a reason - ie. Not signing a fixed term lease. The notice is deemed retaliatory and therefore void.
A 90 day end of lease notice is not as easily challenged, but it must coincide with the end of the lease and as a notice of rent increase is 60 days a lot of agents miss the 90 days notice and therefore cannot serve this type of notice.
If you are determined to have a tenant removed from a property for not signing a lease, there are ways to do it, but serving a 120 day notice at or around the same time the tenant choosing not to accept the offer is not the way to do it.
I second Lil Skater! In VIC 80% - 90% of fixed term tenancies roll over onto periodic tenancies, sadly with our state laws we can't really make a tenant do much at all. The rules still apply but it means that either landlord or tenant can give (appropriate) notice to vacate at any time.
If you do really want to have them leave and it's too late to send a 90 day end of fixed term notice to vacate issue the 120 day notice to vacate but not for a few months. As others have pointed out a 120 day notice could leave you with a vacant property over Christmas period which isn't desirable! Perhaps be looking to have a new tenant start late January and ask your PM about offering a 13 month lease so that next lease renewal will be well past the holiday period
.
If you do really want to have them leave and it's too late to send a 90 day end of fixed term notice to vacate issue the 120 day notice to vacate but not for a few months. As others have pointed out a 120 day notice could leave you with a vacant property over Christmas period which isn't desirable! Perhaps be looking to have a new tenant start late January and ask your PM about offering a 13 month lease so that next lease renewal will be well past the holiday period
.Oh, and just to add onto that - if there is no fixed term in place as it has expired - the tenant only has to give 14 days notice to vacate, instead of 28 days. This is only applicable if you have issued notice to vacate first.
You can certainly make it clear your insurance policy requires it. (The "it's out of my hands" message.) If the tenant still refuses, you cannot force them to sign a new lease, but you can issue a 120 day notice to vacate, for which you do not need to cite a reason for the eviction.
I have never had a problem with this approach, though I can see Lil Skater's point.
Evicting people with not a great deal of notice creates stress for them and increases the likelihood of retaliation. Giving lots of notice gives people heaps of time to plan an alternative dwelling.
I have never had a problem with this approach, though I can see Lil Skater's point.
Evicting people with not a great deal of notice creates stress for them and increases the likelihood of retaliation. Giving lots of notice gives people heaps of time to plan an alternative dwelling.
To evict a tenant, especially one who may have been a good tenant, just for not being willing to sign a fixed term lease seems harsh. The OP hasn't yet said why a periodic lease is a problem. I've had many tenants on periodic leases, one or two have stayed on several years. There's nothing wrong with these.
If the problem is insurance then change the insurance. It will be easier and cheaper than evicting.
If the problem is insurance then change the insurance. It will be easier and cheaper than evicting.
