Bully for you Dazz (and just as well your success is not measured by how nice you are).
I am very happy in Coorparoo with my nice tenants, but thanks for your concern
.
Who pays?
- Thread starter navigator
- Start date
Bully for you Dazz (and just as well your success is not measured by how nice you are).
I am very happy in Coorparoo with my nice tenants, but thanks for your concern
.I was on the beach north of Moffat Beach (can't remember the name now) last week and a woman beside me (about 5.00pm) brushed something off her arm, thinking it was her towel.
It was a brown snake, about ten inches long, a baby. I thought it was odd that it was so far down on the sand. The lifesavers put it in a container to take it and let it go somewhere else, but a snake on the beach would be unusual wouldn't it?
Do you reckon it took a wrong turn?
It was a brown snake, about ten inches long, a baby. I thought it was odd that it was so far down on the sand. The lifesavers put it in a container to take it and let it go somewhere else, but a snake on the beach would be unusual wouldn't it?
Do you reckon it took a wrong turn?
Dazz, some how I read this as the old honey and vinegar comparison. Sorry, I am a honey guy, and it works for me. That being said, I gather I do not attract the vinegar sort of people, so cannot comment on the success of that approach, not having first hand knowledge. I have seen the inside of many court rooms, and have never enjoyed the experience, despite having a high success rate. If I had the choice of spending my time in a positive way or a negative way, its a simple choice, and I find negotiated outcomes have far better results, than the finger in the chest, telling people "how it is". Mate, thats just my opinion.
I agree, minor things I wouldn't be having a dispute over unless it was on-going and the tenant obviously is trying to get everything they can. Not all tenants are out to get what they can and rip everyone off. I am pretty new to all this, so maybe i'm a bit naive also, but I think a good relationship with the tenant would be pretty important. You do right by them, they'll do right by you.
Having said that, I had a tenant come into the office recently asking who was responsible for the garage remote battery because it was flat and they were having to get out of the car all week. For $2 or $3, I can't believe they bothered to ask!
We've had some tenants ask for a new light bulb.
A regular pk of 4 costing a $1.00
He thought we should supply them.
It was easier to give the lightbulb, than bother arguing.
pully, I don't think you're viewing this from the right angle, ie in terms of your legal responsibilities as a landlord. It doesn't matter who owns the tree; if overhanging branches are affecting your property, removing them is at your expense. Your PM sent it on to you because you will probably find, if it ultimately went to an arbitrator, that you're responsible for paying for trimming of the trees to prevent possum ingress.
I'm not saying it's fair, but I'm pretty sure that's what the law would be, anywhere in Australia.
You are such a ****-stirrer, you prickly *******.
Bully for you Dazz (and just as well your success is not measured by how nice you are).
I am very happy in Coorparoo with my nice tenants, but thanks for your concern
It really depends on the parties. I tried Dazz's approach with my student accommodation, and it was disastrous. Why? Residential tenants - no point expecting them to live up to contractual obligations, nobody will force them to. Your best bet of not having residential tenants destroy your place or otherwise screw you over is to build some level of goodwill, and unfortunately you can't leave that entirely to a PM, you get too many "crossed wires". (Notwithstanding the poor buggers I saw on "Selling Houses Australia" last night who bought an IP for the wife's best friend to live in as a tenant, and wife's best friend's 7 kids kicked holes in the walls etc and trashed the place.
)I'm trying a new approach with my student accommodation, dropping in about once a fortnight (usually with new "goodies" - simple stuff like an extra recycling bin, some pavers over the dirt path to the wheelie bins, fixing some small bug-bear like a broken switch, replenishing supplies, but things they notice and appreciate), and over time I've at least met each tenant, even if it's only that once-off encounter. I often have my kids with me, too. I don't engage in lengthy conversations and invite them over to my home, but I shake their hand, introduce myself, and say that I hope they're enjoying their time in Australia and in the house. Thus far, it's made a world of difference. "The landlord" is a real person, with a name and children! I know from my mole (I mean, caretaker) that they all talk of me and know who I am, and there's a level of goodwill. The place has never been so neat and tidy and loved as it is right now, and that's worth a lot in terms of peace of mind, and $. My bad tenants last semester - to whom I was anonymous - cost me about $40K in lost rent (good tenants left) and repairs (damages are still being found). I'm convinced that if I'd taken my current approach at that time, I could at least have nipped the problem in the bud and probably kept the losses down significantly.
I still don't think I'd ever want to self-manage and be too involved in day-to-day stuff, but in my business, I think just a touch of honey and involvement produces the best business outcome.
But if, like Dazz, I was dealing with big corporations with their own lawyers and plenty of money to pay for silks, I'd be taking an entirely different line, as would be appropriate. (And I'm certain that Dazz knows all that; he just gets his kicks out of stirring us all up. I'm going to out him as a teddy bear again if he keeps this up.
)Sensible words indeed Ozperp, and exactly how it works.
I do agree that I would not treat a commercial tenant the same, but if I did have a commercial tenant, it would be a mum and dad set up, so the same approach would probably work there too.
Life does all come back to relationships, in all areas.
I do agree that I would not treat a commercial tenant the same, but if I did have a commercial tenant, it would be a mum and dad set up, so the same approach would probably work there too.
Life does all come back to relationships, in all areas.
Great stuff....for you. I've tried both methods as well, and have found the vinegar approach works for me. I guess it all comes back to our massively varying definitions of "it works" and "happy".
Oh, I attract them all the time....and they are fantastic. In fact, they are so good I go out of my way to seek them. The reason - they usually have very deep pockets and so don't mind at all flicking a bit my way.
I've met and dealt with some of the sweetest honey people in the world, and they are extremely pleasant to deal with, only trouble was they didn't have two brass razoos to rub together.....so we very soon stopped dealing with them.
Hmmmm.....perhaps your method isn't so good after all ?? We have never been to court, not once, and frankly cannot ever envisage a time when negotiation couldn't achieve the same aim in 1/10th the time and 1/10th the cost.....especially when the Tenant is forced to pay our legal bills.
Absolutely agree. I'm normally very happy to yield 1 or 2 degrees from the absolute position, as long as they are willing to bend the other 98 or 99 degrees.
The big difference of course Peterw is that the law that I operate under is firmly on my side, which allows me to take my high yielding vinegar position. You on the other hand operate under a law that is firmly against you and therefore firmly on the side of the Tenant (there's only two opposing sides in our adversarial legal system, as ozperp knows only too well), which forces you to take your low yielding honey position.
The staggering situation however, is that the respective Tenant's Unions and advocacy's around the various states are pushing very hard in all the right places to further weaken your position. Our RTA hasn't been updated since '87. They reckon 23 years is long enough and they fully intend on stripping another whole bunch of powers away from the Landlord.
I'd suggest once they have finished, you'll need another bucket or two of that honey.
It's the honey way or get nothing. I understand completely. No-one can force residential Tenants to do jack squat as ozperp detailed above. You are forced to tip-toe around their domestic dramas, their boyfriend breakups, their Uni holidays, their "I don't do bugs".
Petew - it simply boils down to you don't have the legislative grunt behind you to take any other approach. I get it.
Too many tenants do the same thing for crying out loud! If I was a tenant, I would go and get rid of it, instead of getting the landlord out.
Do you want the landlord to solve all your problems.
What happens when a bird flies over and craps on your washing. Why not get onto the PM and tell them the landlord has to clean it.
Thats where you are wrong!
I respect tenants, and know that if it wasn't for them, they wouldn't be paying for my retirement.
Just because you have difficult tenants is no reason to sell up shop. Huge potential could be lost.
I, within reason, give my tenants what they want. Have just recently decked out new A/C's for some properties I bought, have given tenants woolworths vouchers and movie tickets, and have created a good relationship with tenants, although it is on a professional basis.
If you have concerns with my way of thinking, get out and pay someone to remove the wasp nest before they get stung, and in your words I think, take you to court.
F
I thought that would be an oxy moron ?
I meant we would not be buying a huge complex with a big tenant, but more the type of small commercial stuff you see dotted around the suburbs..... hence my very original term of Mum and Dad commercial .
But I don't like the fact that many of these sit empty for months on end, so I'll stick to residential where I know the risks, and I know what I am doing, and I get to meet nice tenants who treat me as I treat them.
.But I don't like the fact that many of these sit empty for months on end, so I'll stick to residential where I know the risks, and I know what I am doing, and I get to meet nice tenants who treat me as I treat them.
Yes, in this context (relationships), by commercial we mean when you're dealing with a big faceless corporation and the contract is all that matters, and you have no personal relationship with anybody on the other side.I meant we would not be buying a huge complex with a big tenant, but more the type of small commercial stuff you see dotted around the suburbs..... hence my very original term of Mum and Dad commercial
wylie is absolutely right that you can certainly have small commercial properties where the tenants are just as "unbusinesslike" as resi tenants, which is why retail leases are so heavily regulated - they're somewhere in-between residential and "big commercial", and the relationship remains somewhat important.
Fudge, you misunderstand my point. The tenant is asking who is responsible for the removal of the wasps nest. It's a simple question. You have reacted like the tenant is some sort of scheming, planning mastermind, looking to milk you out of your 88 bucks. They aren't asking what happens if a bird dumps on their washing. If you indeed had a good relationship with the tenant, you would know if they were being honest or not.
My point is, if I became like you, and over-reacted to a simple question, it would be time to do something else with my money.
I, within reason, give my tenants what they want. Have just recently decked out new A/C's for some properties I bought, have given tenants woolworths vouchers and movie tickets, and have created a good relationship with tenants, although it is on a professional basis.
So you do all this, yet think someone asking a simple question about a wasps nest is 'trying one on'? You give the tenants 'what they want', yet fly off the handle when someone askes about removal of a wasps nest?
I take dan c's point. Sometimes we landlords - who should know the tenancy laws very well - aren't certain where the boundary lies between tenants and landlords, yet if tenants ask a question (and presumably they know a lot less than us), many landlords make an assumption that the question is asked in bad faith.
It may be that you respond "well, pests that become a problem during tenancy are your responsibility" and they say "OK, fine, we'll attend to it. Thanks."
No biggie.
Exactly, my line of paraphrasing, and pucntuation is directed more at Dan C than how I would react to the tenant.
If the tenant asks with a simple question of can I do it, I would give him a simple answer and say no!, or tell him I can and would arrange it for a fee of $88.
Cheers,
F
Last edited:
