Tenant Stopped Paying Rent

Tenant (in Victoria) stopped paying rent in February before covid-19 hits hard. With the current 6months moratorium on eviction, he is basically staying rent free while not communicating with the agent. We have already indicated to the agent that we are happy with alternate arrangement or discount on rent during this difficult time provided he communicates with us. Agent has already put in an application to VCAT (not sure whats going to happen).

Background: tenant rented for the last 18 months and lately rent has been delayed by 5-7 days minimum. We have allowed him to pay fortnightly instead of monthly when he requested.

We are happy to weather some of the loss for now. But this cannot go on for 6 months can it? No rent payment while being protected from being evicted? Surely there must be a consequence…

Update 1/04/2020
- so our agent has informed us that as this occurs before the moratorium /covid-19 situation - VCAT hearing will still proceed this friday and tenant has not indicated /communicated that he’s in financial hardship due to the virus

  • in terms of mortgage repayment our broker has told us not to freeze repayment if you can afford to as it will cost you more in the long run

  • many comments do suggest that landlords are loaded - yes some are but not us - we are both mid-30s and wife is currently stay-at-home awesome mum with 3 kids. I am working 5-6 days week also struggling with low market confidence.

  • landlord insurance in place - it can only be claimed once eviction noticed is issued (it will cover lost rents from the date of eviction). So if notice is issued this friday - we are already out of pocket from February to March.


  • +67 votes

    It’s the cost of owning an investment.

    • +22 votes


      • +7 votes

        Worse, corona

      • +51 votes

        Equity investors started to lose billions of dollars on 20 February. It is reasonable that other investments would do the same.


        Will they legally be considered squatters though? They've signed a lease. The good news is that it is a lot easier to get rid of a tenant who is not paying rent than a squatter.

        • +3 votes

          I meant that tongue in cheek.

          They're just deadbeat tenants but to the landlord, there's no difference between a tenant that doesn't pay rent (especially for the foreseeable future) and a squatter.

          • +13 votes

            @tshow: Trust me there is. One of our tenants had to move overseas to take care of a sick parent. He asked a friend of a friend to house-sit and take care of his goldfish for him. We only found out about it after several neighbours called my RE to make noise complaints. Turned out that the house-sitter had moved in his junkie girlfriend, her suicidal son and all of their junk. On top of holding parties for his dodgy mates, he was also having domestic fights , followed by loud make-up sex ( the neighbour described it as sounding like someone was skinning a live cat!).He had also changed all the locks the moment he realised what a sweet deal he had.

            The police refused to intervene even after our tenant called them from overseas to explain the situation. It was such a nightmare scenario.

            • +9 votes

              @Jar Jar binks: What happened next?

              • +16 votes

                @Ace26: We had to go after the tenant, which sucked because up to that point he had been irreproachable. We emailed him a 14 days' notice to vacate and sent a copy addressed to the resident of the property, which he ignored. We went to court and was granted a possession order, which he also ignored.

                We then had to apply for a police warrant ( can't remember if we had to go back to VCAT to do it) and that's when we realised that he had changed the lock to the kitchen door and jammed all the others. They were inside but refused to open the door when the cop ordered them to. So the police and our RE went back the next day with a locksmith and to their suprise, found that they had left during the night , leaving a lot of their stuff behind in the garage and a note saying they will come back to collect their things when they could. Mind you , this was 8 weeks AFTER they had been asked to leave and refused to communicate with either my RE or the tenant through the whole process.

                The tenant was still overseas at the time but to his credit paid rent up to the day we took possession of the property. He organised for a friend to collect and store his stuff.We paid someone to get rid of everything else.

                Considering how cooperative the tenant was, and feeling bad for him, we decided to only take his bond, which was about $2700, and leave it at that. We were about a $1000 out of pocket. It could have been worse: the 'house-sitter' and his friends could have completely trashed the place.


                  @Jar Jar binks: if he overstayed 8 weeks, and bond was 2700 (which 4 weeks is standard), then how weren't you out at least 5400? Plus didn't you have to change the broken locks? or was that the part that cost you 1k?


                  @Jar Jar binks: Curious — how helpful was the REA with all this ? In hindsight, would you use an agent again or save the fees (and what % are the fees) ?


                    @Joshhhy: I couldn't fault my RE. Very proactive and kept me informed of all proceedings. She was worth every cent I've paid the agency.we were being charged 8% in management fees if I remember correctly.

                    The only reason we're no longer with them is that we sold that property and bought another one through a private sale. We found a tenant while we were still renovating. That was 2 years ago and the tenants love the place so much that they've recently renewed for another 2 years.

                    My best friend lives in our other IP. He is also a co-owner. It's a complicated situation as the bank wouldn't approve his mortgage and we had just cashed in our shares for something else and had the funds. Not ideal but we didn't want him and his kids to be at risk of becoming homeless during a pandemic. He'll buy us out once things go back to normal. No RE involvement, wouldn't have been worth it.

              • +2 votes

                @Ace26: Most likely those poor goldfish didn't survive.


              @Jar Jar binks: How did you fix this situation?

            • +2 votes

              @Jar Jar binks:

              followed by loud make-up sex ( the neighbour described it as sounding like someone was skinning a live cat!)

              There's a woman living across the road from me in an apartment block who makes the exact same noise. I'm pretty sure the whole street can hear. It's quite disturbing.

              • +1 vote

                @Lockiez: It could be more disturbing: a single lonely woman doing it :-O

              • +7 votes

                @Lockiez: When I was a uni student I had a flatmate who would watch porn every Tuesday night on his laptop and wouldn't always plug in his headphones jack properly. On those occasions, I clearly hear porn noises coming through our adjoining wall. I never brought it up but my other flatmate and I got him a brand new headphone for his birthday.

                • +1 vote

                  @Jar Jar binks: Very regimented. When I was a student, any time was pron time.

                  Edit: College rooms are separate though.


                    @BartholemewH: He was a very dedicated med student, working 2 jobs to keep body and soul together. Tuesdays, after dinner, was porn ; Thursdays he would come out for drinks with the boys and Saturday mornings was soccer practice. I'm sure everything would have been neatly written on his monthly planner.

                    'Bubbles' is now a trauma surgeon :)


                @Lockiez: record it and send a copy to them. Tell them it is so good that it have to be upload to pornhub and reddit for fake love and upvotes.


                @Lockiez: Hard to imagine. Care to record and post? Lol


              @Jar Jar binks: LOL!

              Not sure if renting_out/leasing Real Estate is a good investment but for sure it is so much colorful, exciting, revealing, changing, educational and interesting than virtually anything else!!!!!!

              Compare that with investing in cold and faceless o/s Government Bonds … you just get the same boring pre-established payment every same boring semester in the same same boring account … boooooring …

              "… sounding like someone was skinning a live cat!" … how do they know how does it sound???


      Absolutely. We were definitely well informed of this but this moratorium has put a spin in an already undesirable circumstance

    • +15 votes

      What a load of garbage.

      If they're going to give additional concessions to renters during this time, landlords are equally entitled to some form of compensation.

        • +12 votes

          That's not compensation, you still accrue interest. It would amount to a shitload of additional interest over a long loan term.

          • +5 votes

            @knk: Would you like a bailout for your investment choice?

            • +23 votes

              @whooah1979: No, I would like rental agreements / terms / eviction rules to stay as is.

              Landlords have chosen to take on a level of risk which has just been increased significantly by a change in legislation. If my tenant all of a sudden couldn't pay I'd be compassionate within reason, possibly even offer a rent reduction on the rent I haven't increased in 3 years that's already below market value, sure…but I would not be OK with someone staying rent free for 6 months.

              • +1 vote

                @knk: All investments comes with risks. The GFC hit investor's returns back then and the current crisis is doing it now. Losses and gains are all part of the investment game.

                • +36 votes

                  @whooah1979: Yet people who don't have their shit together and don't have enough savings to get them through some unemployment get a bail out from the government.

                  I'm sick of this elitist shit from people who think that owning an investment property makes you a bad person. I worked my ass off to be where I am and could weather the 6 months without issue but it's not the point.

                  The point is we're getting screwed here and renters are having their ass kissed.

                  FWIW I have no issues with my tenants so far, this is all theoretical and I feel like the change is simply unjust.

                  • -23 votes

                    @knk: This isn’t unjust. What is unjust is someone eating something they shouldn’t have in some backwater place that causes thousands of people to die left, right and centre, millions of people may be out of a job and the markets to drop by 30%.

                  • +3 votes

                    @knk: @knk
                    This so precious.

                    Your tear-soaked complaint you’re getting screwed by short-term measures to assist those less fortunate than you is laughably misplaced.

                    At most, these measures may be in place anywhere from 6-18 months.

                    Negative gearing costs up to $4.5 billion per year, all year, every year, with zero benefit to the economy.

                    Capital gains tax concessions cost up to $10 billion per year, all year, every year.

                    Superannuation discounts which assist property investors cost up to $36 billion per year.

                    But as you say, you’ve obviously worked harder than every single person on the Job Seeker payment. You’ve obviously worked harder than every single renter in this country. You obviously deserve your success far more than anyone deserves a short-term financial boost from the government at the start of what could be the biggest recession, likely depression, for 100 years.

                    What you feel you deserve is not relevant. What you feel others deserve is not relevant. Property investors have been getting a handout for decades. And it will continue for decades after the previous election result.

                    Now, tell us again how hard you’ve worked.

                    • +2 votes

                      @Dinner Plate: This is the issue " those less fortunate than you".

                      Why is this assumption being made? If I did not own a property I would have a lot more money / disposable income in the bank.

                      "Negative gearing costs up to $4.5 billion per year, all year, every year, with zero benefit to the economy."
                      Mine is just barely positively geared, barely past neutral so there goes that idea.

                      "Capital gains tax concessions cost up to $10 billion per year, all year, every year."

                      You mean a loss? We're treated essentially as business entities as landlords unless we have a more complicated structures. We can go bankrupt and we can sell assets, it's all the same. This is what all businesses do, profit and loss and pay tax on the net result.

                      "But as you say, you’ve obviously worked harder than every single person on the Job Seeker payment. You’ve obviously worked harder than every single renter in this country. You obviously deserve your success far more than anyone deserves a short-term financial boost from the government at the start of what could be the biggest recession, likely depression, for 100 years."

                      I'm no economist, and I'm assuming neither are you so we're not really able to weigh in on the depression part. I'm not saying I worked harder, but maybe I've made better financial decisions. Maybe some of these people have just been unlucky. It could go either way.

                      "What you feel you deserve is not relevant. What you feel others deserve is not relevant. Property investors have been getting a handout for decades. And it will continue for decades after the previous election result."

                      No what we deserve is consistent law / legislation which does not favor one party over the other. We do not get a handout, we get to claim a loss when we make a loss.

              • +2 votes


                but I would not be OK with someone staying rent free for 6 months.

                It's not free rent. They have to pay it back after 6 months just like landlords need to pay their bank after 6 months.

                • +4 votes

                  @ILikeBargenz: You won't get it though. If someone can't pay now they're not going to be able to come up with 6x their monthly rent once evicted.

                  Also the problem is that during that 6 month period you're still accruing compound interest. I said it a few times in here but if they want to push pause that's cool but you need to factor in all outgoings for the property including depreciation and maintenance during the no-eviction window.

                • +2 votes

                  @ILikeBargenz: Good luck getting tenants to pay back after 6 months.
                  Unlike the banks landlords don't have any real power to collect.

              • +8 votes

                @knk: I’m in the same situation. Pays to be a loser in Australia.
                Never been on a holiday or enjoyed life like others to buy an investment property to secure my future.
                My tenants never worked and their dole is getting doubled.
                Now they want free rent as well. WHAT THE?!?!
                My job is at risk but can’t get centrelink coz of my asset value.
                Can’t even sell now.
                Thank you Australia for trying to fund my own retirement and paying tax!!!!’


                  @Jumpup: I feel you mate, it's absolutely disgusting. Half the time it doesn't even contribute to the economy.

                  Example - My sister in law is at uni.

                  She's in the process of trying to get newstart + the covid19 weekly payment(and from what it looks like she's eligible). I think it is $550 and $250 per fortnight off the top of my head. A uni student doesn't need more than $800pw, so now she's got no real reason to try and find work (casual retail , no shifts now). She's going to pay for her fuel, phone and whatever necessities she requires and dump the rest into her bank account.

                  FWIW my tenants are great and I highly doubt they'd ever try to take advantage of a situation like this.

                  • -5 votes


                    Half the time it doesn't even contribute to the economy.

                    Worth reminding everyone that landlords are not a productive part of the economy. (Except when it comes to taking handouts from the government. And complaining about tenants.)


              @whooah1979: Why not, Scomos giving out cash all over the place!

            • +4 votes

              @whooah1979: Yeah thats a bit backwards - I don't think anyone wants a bailout - but to a property investor, no tenant is better than a tenant paying no rent.


                @geoffs87: ^This.

                I definitely don't want a bailout. I'm lucky enough my work situation is mostly unaffected.

                I just don't want to have a non-paying tenant.

          • -1 vote

            @knk: Wow, the entitlement is absolutely insane here. Are you also going to have a sook if interest rates go up?

            You chose to take out a loan which comes with financial risk and market uncertainty. If you didn't want that risk, you should not have taken out a mortgage. It was up to you taking out that loan to ensure you had the ability to service and to have a back-up plan should circumstances change.

            I can't believe the ridiculous levels of sympathy investment property owners are expecting through this. Here's an idea: if things are tough for you, sell the asset. Oh, what's the, you'll have to sell for less than you bought for? Or you'll be throwing away a nest-egg? Tough. Luck. You were the one who wanted to invest in the roof over other peoples head out of greed.

            • +9 votes

              @akashra: No - Interest rates are a financial risk which landlords have agreed to take on.

              We aren't expecting sympathy, we're expecting the same treatment that tenants are being given. You want to push pause - push pause for both parties in entirety.

              Landlords aren't here to bankroll the living situation of tenants in tough times, compassion is one thing. 6 months without rent and no option to evict is ludicrous regardless.

              • +1 vote

                @knk: What is a comparable treatment for property owners?
                Because the pause is ONLY on evictions - tenants are still required to pay rent. It'll be a tiny minority who decide not to as they'll still have to face all the complications at the 6 month point when they're booted.

                Perhaps the states could implement an expedited process for obtaining garnishee orders on tenants who stop paying rent?

                • +4 votes

                  @shtgnjns: Comparable treatment for property owners is a freeze on repayments, interest, council rates and an extension of the loan period so that repayments don't go up. I'm not a landlord - this is my objective view on what is fair.


                  @shtgnjns: Okay so in this case if we assume the tenant is going to be basically let off of their obligations for 6 months then we should be too. That includes rates, water, interest + principle during that time and some sort of tax break for maintenance and depreciation.

                  Now it gets tricky because if we do get paid at the end of it then it'd make sense for that interest and anything else on hold to be payable, but what if we don't? Should I be liable to pay 1 month or whatever the current eviction criteria is and then get let off for the remainder? Who knows.

                  "Perhaps the states could implement an expedited process for obtaining garnishee orders on tenants who stop paying rent?"
                  Realistically if a tenant can't pay now they can't pay 6 months worth of rent upfront after 6 months. Chances are we're not going to get the money.

                  So in this situation, at least in my opinion 6 months to evict is just illogical because it favors the renter. The tenants are already in a position where (assuming they lost their jobs) they're being supported to an extent. If that isn't enough, perhaps further support them as opposed to shifting the burden onto landlords is needed. My take on this is that rental agreements should remain in place, if I deem that it's a shit time to find new tenants and my tenant is having a hard time I'd be open to a discussion about reduced rent for a few months or a payment plan for missed rent once they get on their feet.


                    @knk: Well obviously you wouldn't wait for 6 months to obtain said garnishee order, you would instigate the process as soon as they fall 7-14 days behind and don't enter into some other arrangement.

                    But a freeze on property owners costs in the event their tenant doesn't pay rent and the tenant has no income to garnish would be appropriate.


                      @shtgnjns: Regardless mate you're not going to see any of that money in majority of cases.

                      If they don't have the money they don't have the money.

            • +5 votes

              @akashra: It's astounding that you're calling out investors for being entitled - those who have worked hard and sacrificed to own a property - yet you fail to see how entitled it is for a tenant to expect 6 month rent-free holiday. Landlords accept a certain level of risk knowing they can mitigate it. I have rented and if I found myself in a situation where I couldn't afford rent, I'd re-evaluate whether I'm living beyond my means. Others have no qualms living paycheck to paycheck but that shouldn't become a problem for someone else to shoulder. I'm not saying that all tenants would take advantage of this situation, but many will.

              You wouldn't walk into a restaurant and eat a meal without paying. You wouldn't walk into a pharmacy and take medicine without paying. So why would you expect to live in someone's house without paying? If you consider landlords so evil and greedy, then save and purchase your own property. Say no to holidays, stop going out, stop eating out, share housing, live away from the city, make sacrifices, be frugal. SAVE.

              • -1 vote


                It's astounding that you're calling out investors for being entitled - those who have worked hard and sacrificed to own a property - yet you fail to see how entitled it is for a tenant to expect 6 month rent-free holiday.

                It’s astounding that you’ve failed to grasp that a pause on evictions does not equate to a rent-free holiday, as has been repeatedly and clearly stated in multiple replies to this thread.

                It’s astounding that you’ve never met a renter who has worked hard and sacrificed, only for factors beyond their control to rip their financial safety net out from under them.

                Property investors will keep getting their handouts from the government, while contributing exactly zero to the economy in return for their handout.

                • +3 votes

                  @Dinner Plate: Everyone is well aware that a tenant will owe arrears during the 6 month period. But, as has been repeatedly and clearly stated in multiple replies to this thread - landlords continue accruing interest, their debts get bigger, they continue to pay council tax, water rates, and repayments will go up once they resume again. They are the ones currently expected to shoulder the entire burden, and they may also be renters themselves. You might, like others, say that a defaulting tenant is risk that comes with investing in a property. Well, yes, that is the case - but landlords accept that risk knowing that they can take action and mitigate it. Their hands are tied here and that isn't something anybody agreed to. You might, like others, also say 'tough luck - just sell then!' but then, the tenant is even worse off.

                  You also need to be realistic about the likelihood of recouping rent arrears, as has been repeatedly and clearly stated in multiple replies to this thread. Someone who cannot afford to pay rent month-by-month will not be able to pay 6 months worth of rent once the eviction freeze is over. In that situation, the bank wins, the landlord loses and the irresponsible/dishonest* renter has the last laugh.

                  *Now, I never made the blanket assumption that all renters are irresponsible and don't work hard. Obviously covid-19 has resulted in genuine unforeseen hardship for many who don't deserve to be kicked out of their homes, but you also have no idea about the financial circumstances of the landlord. It's a tough situation for everyone but negotiation should be a four-way street (govt, landlords, tenants and banks). Responsible tenants will communicate openly and honestly but they aren't the ones to be concerned about - several landlords in this thread have stated they are willing to reduce rent and offer leeway. The issue is the window for abuse.

                  Also, as far as contribution to the economy goes, I'm pretty sure tax paid on rental income funds your Centrelink handouts in some way - and I've never been ungrateful for a roof over my head, whether someone else owned it or not.

                  I'm neither a landlord, nor a renter, so the moratorium doesn't affect me either way. But it's my objective opinion that this is not a fair or considered decision and that entitled attitudes such as yours are appalling. This decision by the government is a privilege for renters, not a right.

                • +2 votes

                  @Dinner Plate: Above the taxes land lords pay on rental income funds, land lords who rent their investment properties help the economy by providing a competitive rental market. This competitiveness is also fueled by negative gearing, as without negative gearing, land lords would burden a bigger lost and likely to increase rent of their investment properties.

                  Without land lords providing renting properties, it would be up to the government to spend billions to support social housing, which will have other implications (like creating "ghetto suburbs").

                  Land lords to contribute to the economy greatly.

            • +1 vote

              @akashra: Wow. Dumbest thing I've read in a long time.

              I must congratulate you.

        • +2 votes

          What if you are relying on the rent money to buy food?

      • -9 votes

        Boo hoo, my several hundred thousand dollar asset isn't making me money while I sleep, boooooo hoooo.

        • +7 votes

          Grow up

        • +8 votes

          ahhh, the attitude of jealous non-IP owners everywhere.

          • +1 vote

            @geoffs87: I really don't understand it.

            • +3 votes

              @knk: If I can't have it, why should they.

              Interestingly - alot of investors probably earn less than what a bunch of these naysayers do - they just have a different approach in life.

              I had my first IP at about 28, earning around the national average income at the time.

              • +2 votes

                @geoffs87: Yep bought my first property (lived in it though) at 21 or 22 from memory making 40k a year. Now it's my investment purely because it wasn't worth selling it when factoring in bank vals compared to actual values vs rental income vs equity when buying another property.

                • +4 votes

                  @knk: I have properties out for rent too. Worked my ass off for them and sacrificed my social life while my mates are YOLO-ing away. I'm in my early 30s with a young family. I worked very hard to give them a better life. I give the monthly rent to my parents as their living expenses. How stupid of some to lump all landlords together and think of them as parasites.

                  My tenants have been fine so far as their jobs seem pretty stable. I still have to pay my land tax, rates and utilities if my tenants doesn't pay. That's the reality of it. I will cross that bridge when i get to it.

                  • +3 votes

                    @Monkeybob: yep yep, I worked my ass off too. I'm risk averse, I have savings, we haven't over committed on our mortgage we don't live in a fancy expensive house/area. We live within our means, not to say we don't enjoy ourselves within reason.

                    When all this started my wife said to me "I'm glad you manage the finances and we're in this position" (she prefers it this way, I'm not some controlling husband lol). The security of knowing that if we lose our jobs we can keep going for the foreseeable future is priceless.

                    So we in all of this have done the responsible thing and we get literally 0 at the moment in terms of assistance during covid19. Nor should we, I've only received a slight drop in income (1 client is going out of business). I'd have to show my income drop down to the equivalent of less than 27k per year to qualify for any sort of assistance. I could also access my super after an 80% drop. The notion of accessing our super is disgusting.

                    So all in all, for being responsible we are in a position where we still pay taxes and don't require financial assistance from the govt. People who irresponsibly live paycheck to paycheck are getting their asses kissed and landlords getting screwed over with new legislation.

                  • +1 vote

                    @Monkeybob: Omg I thought I wrote this post. I just wrote a post above and saw this. I’m so glad other people like me.

                    I’m 30 as well and in the same situation.

                    • +1 vote

                      @Jumpup: I'm glad to know I'm not alone in thinking this is ridiculous.

                      It's surprising the opinion is so divided in people with / without assets. Absolutely crazy.

              • +2 votes

                @geoffs87: Eh I think your frustration is a little misguided.

                It is important for the economy that folks are not made homeless and the property market doesn't completely collapse.

                With respect to your investment property, it is no more important that you remain afloat with it than it is with someone who is heavily invested in the stock market and will receive no dividends this year.

                The jealousy comment is a funny one as from my experience it is nothing short of projection. There is this delusion within Australia that buying an investment property is the right thing to do in order to achieve financial security. What people gloss over are the significant risks that come along with having an investment property, exactly such as this. Dare I say, if OP is going to be broke after 6 months then OP should never have bought an investment property in the first place.

                Investment properties are typically insanely leveraged, more often than not 80% or more. You think you can invest your money with 80% leverage and just let the rent payments roll in and Bob's your uncle? If someone invests $200,000 in blue chips leveraged against a $800,000 margin would you share the same sympathy you do towards those investing in property? Do you feel it appropriate to bailout those who have invested beyond their means?

                In this crisis, it is far more important that people have a roof above their heads than it is for your investments to generate returns.

                Don't get me wrong, investment property can be great and certainly has a place. However, the amount of people who have bought investment properties when they are not ready to is a timebomb waiting to happen and we are on the precipice of it.


            @geoffs87: jealous of losing money

            • +1 vote

              @monkeyfood: We're potentially able to be screwed over by a change of legislation that does not consider all parties.

              This is the issue.

              If we lose money because property values drop, interest rates go up, a tenant decides to take a sledgehammer to the property and it can't be rented for a while etc or any other scenario like that then it is a calculated risk which we have agreed to take on.

              Also for what it's worth, most landlords are probably not losing money here unless we bought quite recently. My IP value could halve and I'd be back where I started. And once again, that's not something I'd be complaining about as it is a known (however unexpected) risk with property.




    • -8 votes

      Karma is a bitch. Property as an investment is a No-No.
      I know it's the "poor" man investment strategy here in Australia, but it's just shooting in your foot.
      Because investment in property is what is driving the price up.
      So to OP, bite the bullet or sell. No sympathy here

    • +1 vote

      ownership of the property/land itself is the investment. leasing it out is goods/services.

  • +23 votes

    Are you able to put your mortgage payments on hold?

      • +23 votes

        Is it true that when you ask the bank to halt repayments, the interest keeps accumulating and gets added to the principal?
        Would the rent that the tenant doesn't pay get added to his account as arrears?

        • -3 votes

          no idea

        • +11 votes


        • +18 votes

          Yes, the banksters aint missing out.

        • +4 votes

          arrears is always arrears,
          once this is over, if they do not enter into an arrears agreement to repay or if they breach the agreement, then go for either a Tribunal ordered legally binding agreement or eviction.
          Test your landlords insurance, you do have that I hope.

          make sure your agent is serving all appropriate legal notices and ensuring they are ,making contact weekly about the missed payments and noting it all on the tenants account, then at the end of this have all your ducks in a row for the tribunal.

          • +27 votes

            @Austaurean: The problem will be people that can't pay now and don't pay anything for 3-6 months will probably happily walk out at the end with no ability to pay leaving him with a huge lost income and increased mortgage debt. Win for the renter, massive loss for him. The government really didn't think through the no eviction thing very well.

            • +3 votes

              @gromit: Yes that same thought also crossed my mind.

              Small claims court,

              no rental reference and place mark on tenants which will impact future rent applications.

            • +4 votes

              @gromit: On balance, renters have less wealth than investment property owners & people need a roof over their heads. That’s the logic
              Additionally, landlords are enabled through unearned ‘rent seeking’ (standard fair for neoliberal governments) so it’s only right they pay out of their wealth

              • +12 votes

                @Boogerman: generally true. Doesn't make it right that when renters use this crisis as an excuse to get out of paying rent with minimal consequences. most landlords are not rich, they are people with an investment house, some it is their only house and they rent themselves as well. If the government wants to block evictions then they need to pick up the tab for the lost rent not the landlords.

                • +9 votes

                  @gromit: "Doesn't make it right that when renters use this crisis as an excuse to get out of paying rent with minimal consequences"
                  Hope that's not a wide spread assumption of renters.
                  Yes there will be some shit people who will try and may even succeed (possibly from this site) in getting out of it, however many will be the ones who have legitimately lost jobs and have no income.

                  As for all the notifications from the agent, make sure its registered mail or something that they confirm delivery or the occupant has to collect. If they're not working then they have time to go to the post office to collect it!

                  I'd really hope there was some other kind of checks being done to prove they're not receiving the income they previously were due to this rather than just saying it.


                    @91rs: Definitely not all renters. Very glad to be able to pay rent as normal for the foreseeable future. Also don't like moving, at the end of the 6 months when renters can be evicted it will be awful. It wouldn't be a great position for people to get themselves into.

                • -5 votes

                  @gromit: The landlords already get tax exemptions (rent seeking) in a distorted market - their ‘extra income’ from this market distortion can cover the rent

                  • +5 votes

                    @Boogerman: yeah right, they are all rich and can afford to take the massive hits from bank interest, extra tax, rates, expenses etc what a warped sad distorted view of the world you have.

                    • +18 votes

                      @gromit: Well waddya know? Investments carry risks!!!
                      Whoda thunk? I guess I can expect all shareholders to have their drop in share values & cancelled dividends paid for by the government too

                    • +15 votes

                      @gromit: Feels like we live in a society that penalises people who work hard and save?
                      There is no regard to the source of wealth - some might get it the easy way and some might be getting it the hard way.
                      Just because you're wealthy (assuming that ALL landlords are indeed wealthy) that you could be thrown under the bus.
                      Mentality like this is the exact reason for financial irresponsibility.
                      It is really sad…

                      I am a landlord, I am not wealthy, but there are people who think we have endless capability to take losses.

  • Top