Outgoing Tenant Refusing Inspection for Potential Tenant

squashy on 12/05/2018 - 21:00
Last edited 13/05/2018 - 11:12 by 1 other user

Today was the first inspection session for my apartment. I decided to drop by to see the apartment and say hi to the new agents (previous one left the company).

When I arrived, agent told me that the outgoing tenant is refusing to allow anyone to enter the apartment although previously has agreed to do so.

The tenant is now ignoring phone call and emails to arrange for private and scheduled inspections.

Worst case scenario is to wait for them to move out before inspection starts but is there anything I can do to proceed with next Saturday's scheduled inspection?

Home & Garden

Comments

    • try2bhelpful on 13/05/2018 - 15:07
      +2

      I agree. Places look much more spacious when empty and you can control what people see. Went to an open for inspection house where the owners cat missed the cat tray; not very inviting. Imagine the effect of a used condom in an open bin in the bathroom. Showing the house dirty and messy sets the expectation with the next tenant.

    • macrocephalic on 15/05/2018 - 22:56
      +2

      You'd rather lose $1000+ to avoid your new tenants seeing the house in use by the existing tenants? You obviously have more spare money than me.

    • idonotknowwhy on 16/05/2018 - 08:49
      +1

      I take it you're not a landlord then (unfortunately)

    • bl1027 on 16/05/2018 - 11:11

      This is what I would do too.

      I once scheduled an inspection and the day before went to say hello to my tenants (read,check the place was in good order). To my horror, the tenants had made the lounge a bedroom with partitions!

      I decided to cancel the inspection and wait for the tenants to move out. Lost about 2 weeks rent but I don't think anyone would have wanted to rent it anyway if they saw it in that condition.

      • Osprey06 on 17/05/2018 - 15:13

        A note of caution - it may be illegal, in your jurisdiction, to make unannounced visits. E.g. in the ACT, "inspections" require at least one week's notice.

  • Speckled Jim on 13/05/2018 - 17:10
    +4

    One possible solution. Not perfect, but everything is a compromise.

    Once vacated and cleaned etc, have agent/owner conduct the inspection. If all ok, use a 360 camera to make a virtual tour.
    Next time it's advertised for rent, anyone can see it clean, neat and empty. Have it like Google street view including date of capture.

    This truly represents what prospective tenants will get, without disrupting the previous tenant.

    Affordable current technology put to use without exploiting anyone. Might that be a first?

    • squashy on 13/05/2018 - 19:54
      +1

      It won't be the same though

      • kingmw on 16/05/2018 - 00:06

        Agreed, it's not going to work. To many variables and tenants have to develop emotional attachment before they will consider renting.

    • jace88 on 16/05/2018 - 11:59

      It'll work to get people to visit the property for an inspection, but I don't know too many people willing to sign a lease without physically walking inside the property first.

      • Osprey06 on 17/05/2018 - 15:15

        Even if they're willing to sign, it can invalidate a rental agreement if a tenant signs before sighting the property. I don't think a 360 degree 'virtual tour' will class as having sighted the premises.

  • bobbified on 14/05/2018 - 12:44

    What was the agent attempting to schedule? The lease has the word "reasonable" in it, but that obviously has different meanings to different people.

    Have you tried giving them some incentive? Apparently it's common practice to discount the rent during the open for inspection periods.

    Is it a single person in the place or a whole family? It's not exactly effortless to expect a whole family to tidy up and disappear for a period of time each week. It's much easier for a single occupant.

    The landlord of the previous place I rented wanted to sell the property and, while it was inconvenient at times, I looked at things from the landlord's perspective.

    Most of the inspection times were on a Saturday morning (apparently that's the busiest time) and often I'd have a big Friday night so waking up early every week wasn't the easiest thing to do - but I understood the reasons and did my best to accommodate them.

    Sometimes there were private inspections during the day when I was at work. I put away all my valuables and said to them that the could do whatever they want.

    It took 9 months for the property to sell and the landlord surprised me by giving me the last month's rent for free and took me out for a nice and expensive dinner.

    • kingmw on 16/05/2018 - 00:10
      +1

      "Reasonable" does not equate to financial incentive.

      Never heard of rental discounts during inspection periods for future tenants (as most places are usually rented out within 2 weeks in Sydney) but I could understand if the place was put up for sale then 9 months of inconvenience is different.

  • zuuutoootuuu on 14/05/2018 - 15:28
    +4

    Be reasonable and wait for them to move out, fix the property and then show potential tenants. It's not worth having to deal with hidden damage they can do.

  • myusername on 14/05/2018 - 16:03
    +3

    smoke them out

    • daydream on 16/05/2018 - 23:23

      Tenants are probably already on bongs ;-)

  • Gronk on 14/05/2018 - 16:07
    +1

    Well it's written into VIC tenancy agreements that during the last 14 days the tenant must allow the agent access to the property to show prospective tenants, so based on this there's probably formal action you can take but given you're in the last 14 days of the tenancy my guess is that they'll be long gone before any of those cogs have turned - even slightly.

    Probably not much for it but to wait until they're gone and hope the place is in good order - I'd also consider getting an agent who is a bit more - able - to do their job.

  • vija on 14/05/2018 - 16:35
    +1

    Sell the house and never buy an investment property to rent again. I've had too much pain with tenants and this is in a nice area. It includes me always fixing whatever is wrong straight away and never increasing the rent in an effort to build rapport with the tenants.
    Just remember the tenant has all the rights and power. Heck I had a meth lab in one house, again in a nice area surprisingly, the place was raided, dude arrested. He was bailed and back in the house that night and I had no rights to kick him out without going through the normal painfully long process.

    • idonotknowwhy on 15/05/2018 - 16:13
      +2

      Sell the house and never buy an investment property to rent again.

      Yep, I wish a lot of people would do this to fix the "housing affordability crisis".

      • No ONE on 15/05/2018 - 19:49

        😂

    • macrocephalic on 15/05/2018 - 23:07
      +1

      You sound like my old neighbour. He rented the house himself for a few years:
      - Tenant1: Was prostituting herself from the house. Unregistered and unrestrained pets. Children wandering the streets. House was left in a disgusting mess (could smell it when the owner came in to clean).
      - Tenant2: Selling drugs. Towards the end, a woman came running out of the house one day and ran to one of our neighbours claiming she had been held against her will and to call the police. Police raided and arrested the tenant.
      - Tenant3: This time the owner decided to rent through a RE agent (Ray White). The agent leased it to himself, didn't pay any rent. He and his friends setup an identity theft operation in the house and were stealing mail from the suburb - and even managed to withdraw $20k of the owner's superannuation (the owner is in his 30's). The owner got them evicted and changed the locks. The tenants called a locksmith and got back in. The house was raided by the police again.

      I live in a pretty quiet suburban area, not a really expensive area, but pretty close to some expensive areas. Everyone else on the street is nice, we know most of them. Not sure how the owner of the house next door found so many lowlifes to rent his house to.

      • h4zey on 16/05/2018 - 16:13
        +2

        WTF??? o.O

      • daydream on 16/05/2018 - 23:27

        They could've turned that into a great reality TV show if they set up cameras lol

    • DingoBilly on 16/05/2018 - 11:33

      I'm always surprised by these sorts of things. I don't understand how this happens if you do purchase a place in a nice area and do your research and obtain a good real estate agent.

      If you're buying in scummy areas or are trying to save money by not using a real estate agent I kinda see why it happens, but otherwise just seems really unlucky. Haven't had an issue whatsoever with any of my tenants myself.

  • RobVH on 14/05/2018 - 17:00
    +2

    It Depends what state you are in, in SA for example.

    In SA if its within 28 days of the tenant vacating, you can supply them with adequate notice that you will be showing someone through the property.(7-14 days) The easiest way to do this is Document, document, document.
    If they have provided an email on their standard tenancy agreement, it stipulates that they agree to it being used to communicate. Ditto Phone numbers. Send them a txt, send them an email, if they do not reply, you have given them adequate notice and can enter the premises, although I would recommend doing so with your agent. For good measure send them a letter in the post also notifying them of intent. It's then up to them to renegotiate a time with you if that doesn't suit them. If they respond and decline your request they are in breach of their tenancy, that's what SACAT is for.

    Chances are with how slow SACAT processing can be, they will be out of tenancy before you get the opportunity.

    **Edit the above is for rental inspection/viewing, for Sales its a different scenario. Read your contract.

  • Cerdig on 14/05/2018 - 18:06
    +3

    Give them the required written notice of an inspection then use your or the agent's key to enter the premises and do the inspection.

  • tonsta on 14/05/2018 - 19:48
    -2

    Nothing, your disturbing the tenants peace if you keep asking for access. Tenants would respond well to a nice landlord.

  • LUTSlit on 14/05/2018 - 19:51

    Everybody's an expert as usual. The landlord gives notice in writing as per the act, and in they go on the day with the office keys.

    • trapper on 15/05/2018 - 12:08
      +1

      How does that work when the tenant is at home resisting entry? It doesn't.

    • Osprey06 on 17/05/2018 - 15:28

      Everyone's an expert, including you. Just because you've given written notice, doesn't mean you have the right to enter the premises. Besides which if you're trying to show the place to prospective new tenants while the existing tenant is hurling abuse at you for entering without their permission, that's hardly a good look!! No one's going to want to rent from a landlord whom thinks they can enter whenever they like…

      In most (all?) jurisdictions, tenants are required to provide "reasonable access" to the place in the final weeks of the tenancy agreement, as others have stated. If the tenant refuses access, you'd have to get Tribunal/equivalent orders to enter the premises, which is likely to take weeks).

      What you could do afterwards is seek compensation from the tenant as their refusal to let you show the property deprived you of rental income. I.e. If the tenant had let you show the place you could have lined up a new tenant to move in straight away. Because they denied you legal access, the place was vacant for 2 week while you showed it and arranged a new tenant. In this case, a tribunal may judge the old tenant liable to pay two extra week's rent. Whether it's worth trying to enforce that is another matter…

  • J23SD on 14/05/2018 - 21:01
    +1

    I would also consider a tenant asking that any strangers walking through their house be supervised by an agent at all time to be reasonable as well. I really do not see how letting unsupervised people walk through your house which you are paying to live in to be a reasonable request.

    • chichi on 15/05/2018 - 09:58
      +1

      I've never seen an agent supervise an inspection. They generally stand at the front door noting down ID (not even everyone's ID when busy) then after a while will wander inside to advise the 15 minute inspection is about to finish. We've seen people open cupboards, drawers and wardrobes with the tenants property on show and available to grab. I'd imagine the only way to have a fully supervised inspection is if the agent was only showing one or two people through at a time.

      Lately we've noticed the agent isn't even the one listed on the ad and when asked a question about the property they know absolutely nothing - even had a few admit they hadn't even walked through the house before the inspection.

  • mgsydney on 14/05/2018 - 21:48

    Your agent should be working his butt off to make it work - make him work for his money!

  • lainey13 on 14/05/2018 - 22:48
    +2

    With enough notice the agent can just let themselves in. Doesn't matter if you don't receive the notice, or object, or want to change the time. They can just force their way in. Yay tenant rights!

  • dufflover on 15/05/2018 - 00:39

    Assuming you've followed all the required legal stuff like lead time notice, maybe even their written agreement on the inspections, and they are now treating you like this to not even return calls, sorry I think you're going to be left with a bit of a cleanup/damage bill :S. Not a good sign anyway with that kind of attitude.

  • ozzpete on 15/05/2018 - 01:12
    -7

    Leave the poor tenant alone (unless it is in rental agreement that tenant must allow you in before they have vacated ? ) .
    They are in the middle of moving, and probably just don't want you seeing the place (and their belongings) in a messy state.
    I understand your frustration, they informally agreed to previously to allow people through the place while they are still there. However, try to empathize with their position and their rights also.
    It is my understanding that the property is under the control and possession of the tenant until they move out, and this is what they have paid for.
    Think of similarly to for example… situation whereby you are employed to do a job, then asked to do extra hours without pay, or if you hired a car for 3 days, and asked 2 days into the hire, can you bring it back half a day early. Sure you might agree to either of these scenarios, being nice, but you're not obligated to. Likewise, the tenant is not obligated to allow you early access to the property they're paying rent on. Things maybhave changed, and maybe they just don't want strangers in the way, or seeing the place in a mess, things in boxes everywhere etc, while they are in the process of moving.
    Remember, moving is something we don't do often, and we often underestimate the stress and work involved in the moving process .
    The last 2 times I moved, I think it took approx 5x more amount of time to pack everything etc, than I had initially expected. I can understand that the last thing someone wants during this process is to be bothered with pre-inspections. If you want something like this, perhaps you should have offered the tenant a disount in the last couple of weeks to make up for the intrusion on property which they have every right to, and have a paid for, full control over .
    Similarly to the previous example.. of being asked to work extra without pay… if you received extra pay, you might be more OK with it. And if someone asked you to return hire car early, you might be more accommodating if a disount were offered on the last day of car hire.
    Has the tenant even got somewhere else organized to stay, have they got moving sorted, people to help etc. You are asking the tenant to go out on a limb, an intrusion on what is likely a difficult process for them moving, maybe try being considerate of them, and offer to help them with moving .

    • DiscoJango on 15/05/2018 - 11:19
      +3

      Good lord. Im glad you are not in a position of any legal decision making.

      • secondstory on 15/05/2018 - 16:52
        +1

        Funnily enough this is also probably very accurate in terms of how the uninformed tenant sees it.

        • Daniel Plainview on 15/05/2018 - 17:18

          In 2018 being simply 'uninformed' on such a well documented area really isn't a viable excuse. I mean heck if you're literate then refer back to the rental agreement - it's not rocket science.

          Alas even in 2018 the moron is alive and well. As the tenant you've got to know where you stand and that you have very little leverage (again I rented for 20yrs+ and never lost a single cent on any of the bonds - over 6 of them) but if you know your stuff and work constructively with your agent generally you get the best possible outcome for yourself (and to be fair we had some very dumb & lazy agents that we had to set straight but its not that hard & often they'll try to get away with stuff so reading up a little is time well invested).

          This is especially the case in more competitive markets e.g capital cities - as being a 'bad tenant' isn't a great plan when you're likely going to be renting for the med-long term. Win the battle but lose the war.

  • mezje on 15/05/2018 - 08:52
    +5

    Shitty that the tenant agreed and then went cold.

    Personally I would not allow any sort of inspection while I was still living there, moved many times as both a kid and adult and had things stolen during many inspections. Giving people an insight in to your house while you live there is also not pleasant, plenty of bad people out there…

    Regardless of all the laws I would just wait it out, seems they are all ambiguous.

  • pformag on 15/05/2018 - 09:51
    +7

    Beer economy. Offer to buy them a slab for 30min inspection.

    • Zondor on 15/05/2018 - 10:55
      +2

      The Aussie way.

    • follow on 15/05/2018 - 13:06
      +2

      Concrete economy. Offer to buy them a slab for 30min inspection.

  • Black Brown Blue on 15/05/2018 - 11:52
    +2

    I am all good for inspections where there is 1/2 prospective tenants. If it’s a group inspection then no. I had around 5 inspections for my last rental place and the agent gave 24 hour notice through sms. They said one inspection will have no more than 1 prospective tenant and agent will record their name and number. I know there is risk but tenant should not leave any valuable lying around especially if there is going to be a planned inspection. Also the rental agreement states that agent can access the property for inspection if needed.

  • trapper on 15/05/2018 - 12:04
    +4

    It sucks but don't escalate, it will make things worse - instead de-escalate!

    Just say that you realise how much of an 'inconvenience' this is and offer some small compensation.

    Beer is good, or some kind of vouchers might do it.

    $50-$100 is far far cheaper than any other option you have

    • bl1027 on 16/05/2018 - 11:23
      +2

      Or if you want them out of the house during the inspection, offer to pay for their coffee and breakfast at the local cafe OR beers at the pub.

      Did this for my previous tenants and they were happy to do so.

      You'll usually get what you want using a softer approach rather than 'laying down the law' .

      • wordplay on 16/05/2018 - 21:40
        +1

        also had that done for us, came back to the xbox missing - 'you have contents insurance though right, no big deal'

  • djmm on 15/05/2018 - 13:10
    -1

    What a dumbass tenant. Why would you piss someone who will be deciding on your bond money?
    Now landlord will inspect the house with dine tooth comb

  • Daniel Plainview on 15/05/2018 - 13:11

    Unsure why OP is asking for advice on OzB - you have a professionally trained RE agent, who should be completely familiar with both the tenant, the lease and what can/can't be done - you've paid them to handle stuff exactly like this. Whilst I'm as big a fan of OzB the vast majority of this thread seems to be straight out unsupported opinion e.g" They're moving so leave them alone".

    IMHO both your best, most effective and simplest solution is to use the agent to resolve - you've paid for them and they know exactly what can and can't be done.

    FWIW I'd be 99.9% certain you're completely in the right both legally and morally and so I'd just let the agent know how 'firmly' you want them to resolve the matter.

    Also… yes the inspections when you're moving out are a PITA - (I did them for ~20yrs before buying a place of my own) but they're in the lease that you sign up to and also when you rent the property originally you EXPECT the old tenant to allow you to view as well - so it's really not a big ask and there are rules there to ensure plenty of notice and minimal hassle to tenant. Not complying is really just cutting your own throat as renting another property will become very hard when RE agents find out you acted in this manner. So very poorly thought through.

    • [Deactivated] on 15/05/2018 - 13:57

      "Unsure why OP is asking for advice on OzB".
      You are providing it.
      Spot the irony?

    • infinite on 15/05/2018 - 15:32
      +2

      It's likely exactly because he has a realestate agent, that he's asking for advice here. Their modern day door to door salesman and have little to any clue or formal education/training in anything relevant to the laws governing their own industry, let alone contract law or consumer law.

      • Daniel Plainview on 15/05/2018 - 17:11

        Sweeping generalisation anyone? Do you say this with any knowledge of the Property Management industry? I suspect not, so really what do you have to back up this pretty massive comment - that essentially property managers have near zero industry knowledge?

        Sorry but thats a very daft comment & patently false. You may have had bad experiences with a property manager but thats got noting to do with either your comment or the matter at hand.

        Again another example of folks just blurting out unsubstanciated opinion thats masquarading as 'legit advice'.

        • infinite on 16/05/2018 - 17:01
          +3

          I've worked in property law for over 15 years and work as a contract civil assessor. In all my time in the industry, I've never once met a property manager who had any detailed knowledge or understanding about how the law works in regards to tenancies - civil or commercial. At least the commercial property managers have the decency to have Conveyancers and solicitors do the contracts and nitty gritty details for their clients. CA work at the tenancies office is a painful example of this, as the number of successful orders or defenses of orders from property managers is borderline tiny. Not even because they don't deserve the orders, but because tenants have a better knowledge of the relevant tenancies act's and consumer laws in their state and run rings around them in hearings while the property managers simply echo "well how is that fair for my client". The number of hearings where tenants are awarded the order or claim simply because the property agent/manager simply doesn't understand how to argue a basic fundamental legal defense of it is staggering - despite only needing to read a couple of basic fact sheets provided for free online by the tenancies offices to know the info they should have.

          I still can't believe that for the most part you need a qualification and registration to advertise and sell a property, but literally nothing to actually then manage it and lease one. It's ludicrous. Especially given the personal and financial implications of being a lessor or lessee.

        • [Deactivated] on 18/05/2018 - 13:42
          +2

          @infinite: I commend you for exercising restraint in the face of such an ignorant rant. Nikko's avatar would appear to be a selfie.

  • thord on 15/05/2018 - 15:06
    +5

    I understand why tenants hate inspections. Apart from the invasion of privacy, theft happens. A big problem is happening now with sales and open homes, thefts are becoming more and more frequent and often you're not going to notice items missing for weeks. This is a real concern when there's 5+ couples coming through a place.

  • [Deactivated] on 15/05/2018 - 21:52
    +1

    Poor owner. I pity that whilst you and the agent benefit financially the current tenant gets no cash gain.

    Simple solution stop being so selfish and inconsiderate and just offer to give the tenant free rent for the day each day they allow you to bring potential tenants to inspect.

    They will in return are more likely to speak positively about the premises and really your loss will be little. I know this is a bargain site but stop being so cheap!

    • c0balt on 16/05/2018 - 15:21
      -1

      Oh no, how dare he want to make money as per the contact the tenant signed themselves and even agreed verbally before cutting off communication.

      The tenant is being a POS by breaking their lease conditions. Not the other way around.

  • [Deactivated] on 16/05/2018 - 01:17
    +1

    The amount of people suggesting threatening the tenant with this and that makes you all sound like bikies.

  • YellowHouse on 16/05/2018 - 06:38
    -1

    It's just heartless. Don't do it. What is a week or two's rent in the grand scheme of things? If you don't care about this part of human life it will come back to bite you, in your relationships, how people treat you over time, whether people want to help you out when you're in need of a bit of grace etc.

    • YellowHouse on 16/05/2018 - 13:57

      Porkin Across America
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PwQns6vGfj4&t=23s

    • c0balt on 16/05/2018 - 15:16
      +1

      What's 2 weeks rent to OP?

      $1000+ of lost income if they have to spend another 2 weeks finding a new tenant.

      If you cared about human life as much as demand others do, then why don't you pay the $1000 to the OP so that the tenant can keep refusing to adhere to their lease conditions. That way everyone will be happy seeing as you don't care about money and seem to think that 2 weeks rent is pocket change.

      • YellowHouse on 16/05/2018 - 15:25
        -1

        It's not really pocket change, it is a lot of money. But it's just not the right thing to do. If it is imperative you get people to move in the second someone has moved out, why not advertise 2 months in advance and maybe have one day when people can come in. But life just doesn't work like that. Things come in ebbs and flows and you need to take into account these things in a realistic manner. You could have a bad tenant move in and then you lose one or two months of rent. So you can't really rely on it being rented every week of the year. It's just general life advice, when you're desperate there is the temptation to control things to the finite degree, but people don't like it, and when you just give an ounce of a sh** about what's real for people you'll find they cooperate with you in ways you didn't even dream of.

        • c0balt on 18/05/2018 - 13:12

          The right thing to do is what the law states, not break an agreement you signed and then refuse to answer any calls from your landlord or rental agency. Why not advertise 2 months before? Because that would really piss of the tenant to have people making inspections 2 months before they leave. The current law only allows 2 weeks because that was what was deemed reasonable, and you want to make it 2 months because you think that would be better for the tenant? Lol!

          People like yourself need to put themselves into the OPs shoes, not keep begging for us to be understanding of some scumbag tenant.

          Stop with the bleeding heart tripe, the renter knew what they are getting into when signing the lease. Don't rent if you don't want to be a decent human being and allow the landlord to conduct inspections as per the law and the lease agreement.

          OP tried giving an ounce of sh** as you said, the renter didn't give an ounce of sh** back.

          I've been a renter, then I was a landlord, then I moved into the property I bought. The tenants at that property allowed the previous owner to conduct the inspections while they lived there, because that's the law. Once I bought the place I offered them 2 weeks free rent to move out within 2 months, 6 months before their lease was due to expire.

          I know how to get what I want from people by being operative, understanding, and pragmatic - but if it's not reciprocated then I'm also a person who knows how to get what they want using other methods, in this case it would be the law and their bond for breaking the lease conditions and forcing me to not be able to conduct inspections for the last 2 weeks of the lease, as per the signed rental contract.

        • YellowHouse on 18/05/2018 - 15:05
          -1

          @c0balt: Did you like it, people coming in and out of your space as you were leaving?

        • c0balt on 19/05/2018 - 10:42
          -1

          @YellowHouse:

          Doesn't matter what I like. Everyone has to play by the same rules. Having inspections in the last 2 weeks of renting is one of those rules and if I sign something I understand that I'm agreeing to those rules.

          I can't stand when people try and worm their way out of their responsibilities regardless if it was a speeding fine, bad parenting, broken promises, breaking lease conditions they signed ect.

        • YellowHouse on 19/05/2018 - 13:25

          @c0balt: Sorry C0balt, that does sound sh##. People not doing the things they say they'll do can be rip your hair out maddenin:(

        • c0balt on 21/05/2018 - 11:08

          @YellowHouse:

          A lot of people on this forum seem to think that they don't have to adhere to the responsibilities that everyone else has to, what the law states, and even ones they signed.

          They are emotionally connected to this idea that landlords are all rich bad people, and people who rent are all incredibly good people who only are only capable of being bad when the landlord deserves it.

          They are all scum, and I wear your downvotes with pride. If they are at a position in life where they believe that landlords are all evil capitalists and they don't need to follow contracts that they signed, then they have real problems that they can't fix and while I could feel sorry for them, I feel better that they are in that bad position because it's what I believe they deserve for their complete lack of self and civic responsibility.

  • Austaurean on 16/05/2018 - 08:36
    +3

    IN The ACT -
    Residential Tenancies Act
    http://www.legislation.act.gov.au/a/1997-84/current/pdf/1997…

    Tenancy Agreement states
    ATTACHMENT A

    Schedule 1 Standard residential tenancy terms

    Access for purchasers and new tenants
    80 The tenant must permit reasonable access to the premises during the period of 3 weeks before the end of the tenancy, on the lessor giving 24 hours
    notice, to allow inspection of the premises by prospective tenants.
    81 The tenant must permit reasonable access to the premises, on the lessor giving 24 hours notice, to allow inspection of the premises by prospective
    purchasers of the premises provided:
    (a) the lessor intends to sell the premises; and
    (b) the lessor has previously notified the tenant in writing of the lessor’s intention to sell.

  • Bargainaholic on 16/05/2018 - 18:11
    -2

    There isn’t much you can do.
    By the time the REA applies to the tribunal for an access order, the tenants would have vacated.
    As the agent, I wouldn’t be doing any favours when it comes to their bond claim for any damages/cleaning at the final inspection.
    Apart from fair wear and tear, I would charge them for every single issue that isn’t mentioned on the entry report.
    That is the only legal way to get back at them for the financial impact due to the potential lengthened vacancy period.
    For the next tenants, advise your agent to include in depth special conditions into the residential tenancy agreement to cover the inspections during the tenants notice period.

    • kingmw on 16/05/2018 - 20:19

      You can recover the tribunal costs from the bond too. Don't agree with the last statement though, most tenants are quite reasonable.

      • Osprey06 on 17/05/2018 - 15:34

        Agreed re: disagreement on the last point!

        The legislation and tenancy act will already have enough provisions to cover (see Austaurean's post above) + any non-standard provisions will usually require the approval of a tribunal, or may be deemed an invalid/unfair agreement - can't just add whatever the F you like.

        Wait 'til the tenant has moved out and seek compensation from bond/tribunal for 2-3 weeks rent, depending on how long the property is vacant for while you try to arrange a new tenant.

  • daydream on 16/05/2018 - 23:34
    +1

    Tenant probably listed property on Airbnb and doesn't want to disturb his customers ;-)

    • [Deactivated] on 17/05/2018 - 14:59
      +1

      Tenant probably listed services on Airtasker and doesn't want to disturb his/her clients ;-)

  • ozberg on 17/05/2018 - 14:28

    Could be because of something as simple as having a pet whereas they know their Tenancy Agreement prohibits tenants from having them.

  • Eeples on 26/05/2018 - 23:27

    OP to your knowledge was this session going to be effectively an 'open house' in which more than one perspective tenant would have been inspecting?

    How long was this session supposed to be?

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join