Rent Increase and Termination Notices

msmhw on 18/03/2024 - 00:35
Last edited 18/03/2024 - 00:46

Hi everyone,

I have a question about these notices.
I understand there is 60/90days period before they become effective.

My question is, should they count the period from the same day that the notice delivered?

For example, if the rent increase notice received by email on the 1st of March, to increase the rent from the 30th of April. Is this valid notice?
If you count the delivery day, it's 60days. But if it's not included, it's 59days.
And does it matter what time of the day you receive the notice?

Home & Garden

Comments

  • tsunamisurfer on 18/03/2024 - 00:46
    +44

    FFS. Are you really going to play these games and say the whole notice is invalid because I refuse to count Day 1?

    If you don't want the property thats fine, leave, so that the landlord can find a better tenant.

    • msmhw on 18/03/2024 - 00:58
      +2

      Its the other way around, the tenants taking my friend (the landlord) to tribunal over this issue. Also, they are asking for what they paid for previous rent increases back because the notices were invalid. They mentioned their solicitor just noticed that and they weren't aware of it.

      • jv on 18/03/2024 - 09:56
        +7

        Don't renew the lease. Find another tenant. It won't be hard.

          • jv on 18/03/2024 - 12:01
            +3

            @joka:

            The option to not renew a lease is basically non-existent.

            Not true…

          • Clear on 18/03/2024 - 12:17
            +2

            @joka:

            The option to not renew a lease is basically non-existent.

            Ermmm……. no that's not how it works. You think the tenants are the only ones who decide if a lease will be renewed or not.

            Under my state the following applies and that's exactly what I've done.

            If the owner does not wish to extend or renew the lease, they must serve the tenant with a Notice to Vacate at least 42 days (but not more than 60 days) before the lease end date.

            I'm sure other states are the same.

            • joka on 18/03/2024 - 13:34
              +1

              @Clear: Actually - i found the equivalent for Victoria. Good to know!

              • Clear on 18/03/2024 - 13:47

                @joka: If a landlord tries to kick them out during the middle of the lease that's a different story.

            • boirganz on 20/03/2024 - 10:22

              @Clear: It's still only QLD and SA. And partially Vic.

              So tennants are at the mercy of their landlords everywhere else and you can evict at the end of a lease with notice, but without cause.

              The housing situation is beyond stupid now in major cities in Australia and is really tearing at the fabric of our society. But hey - provided housing prices keep going up the economy is 'growing' and that's a Good Thing right ?

          • LFO on 18/03/2024 - 14:52
            -3

            @joka: Why ? How come ?

            No new lease and notice to vacate and that is it.
            No anger just the way it is.

            Or are they "First Nations" tenants?.
            Or something similar.

            • MrTweek on 19/03/2024 - 16:30

              @LFO: Nope, in Victoria the landlord has 1 chance to terminate without reason - and that is 90 days before the first fixed term ends. Given that they missed the 60 days deadline to increase rent at the end of a fixed term, it sounds like this time has passed and they can't terminate without reason any more.

              If they are in Victoria, that is.

              • LFO on 19/03/2024 - 20:15
                +1

                @MrTweek: Sounds unfair … to say the least.

                So the owner could NEVER EVER end the lease?

                I think we are mixing "current lease" with "renewed lease".

                Besides, there could always be "a reason": renovating, selling, grandma moving in …

                I'm not in VIC but doesn't feel quite clear.

                • MrTweek on 19/03/2024 - 21:12
                  +3

                  @LFO:

                  So the owner could NEVER EVER end the lease?

                  Not if they want to keep renting it out afterwards, no.

                  The idea is that the landlords desire to have a different tenant is less important than the tenants desire to not become homeless.

                  Besides, there could always be "a reason": renovating, selling, grandma moving in …

                  True, but you need to provide evidence for any of these. If you claim that your grandma is moving in, you need to sign a stat dec explaining who is moving in, and you then can't rent out the unit for 6 months after the tenant moves out.

                  They designed the new laws in a way that you can't kick out a tenant just because you want to.

                  This has been common practice in Europe for decades and is long overdue here.

                  • LFO on 20/03/2024 - 14:31

                    @MrTweek:

                    Not if they want to keep renting it out afterwards, no.

                    Well, I am speechless …

                    So they can continue renting the same dwelling for, say 50 years, paying the same amount of rent? Never to be changed??
                    I'm missing something?

                    What if the investor sells? The new buyer gets the old residents too?
                    For life? Again?

                    This has been common practice in Europe for decades and is long overdue here.

                    Long, usually life-long leases, are well known in some European cities but not clauses to make new leases to new residents impossible.
                    Anyhow, we are not there.

                    • MrTweek on 20/03/2024 - 23:07
                      +1

                      @LFO:

                      So they can continue renting the same dwelling for, say 50 years, paying the same amount of rent? Never to be changed??
                      I'm missing something?

                      The owner can still increase rent every 12 months.

                      What if the investor sells?

                      Selling is one of the 2 reasons left you can easily kick out a tenant. The other reason is if owner or a family member wants to move in.
                      Both require evidence though, so you actually have to do it, not just pretending to.

                      Long, usually life-long leases, are well known in some European cities but not clauses to make new leases to new residents impossible.

                      No. In Europe you simply can't kick out a tenant, as long as they pay their rent on time (and don't do dumb shit). If you want to sell it, you'll sell it including tenant, so it kinda has to remain an investment. But it's common for investors to prefer buying IPs with long term tenants, as that means solid income.
                      Fixed term leases are not a thing. You are month-to-month from day 1 and tenants can always move out with 3 months notice.

                      Life-long leases are not defined as such, but can become life-long if the tenant chooses so.

    • HeWhoKnows on 18/03/2024 - 22:16
      -2

      Notices can be sent via email
      So effective start/delivery date is the same day.

      Is OP going to suggest the date should start from the day they check/open the email now?

      OMG
      We are talking about 90 days notice.
      Not 9 days notice.

      Just start looking for another place OP and stop worrying about such trival matters.

    • Willy Beamish on 19/03/2024 - 21:32

      Typical ozbargain assumptions gone wrong.

  • El cheepo on 18/03/2024 - 00:47
    +1

    If you count the delivery day, it's 60days. But if it's not a included, it's 59days.

    delivery day is usually included and usually coincides with your rent due date anyway.

    does it matter what time of the day you receive the notice?

    No.

    • msmhw on 18/03/2024 - 01:16
      -2

      So the case will be dismissed? Even if the landlord didn't attend?

      • El cheepo on 18/03/2024 - 01:38
        +2

        No one here knows the answer to that.

        We don’t have all the facts and details that the tribunal will have.
        Regardless, everyone here has nothing but opinions to offer.

        The decision will be the tribunals.

        But (imo) based on your limited information offered, it seems unlikely to go the tenants way.

        Are they actually trying to argue time of day or 1 day difference?

        • msmhw on 18/03/2024 - 01:55
          -1

          Fair point. I thought it should be written clear somewhere but couldn't find any information.

          I guess people sometimes do crazy stuff if things related to money.
          They are asking for over $10k back for the previous rent increases as they are 1 day short.

          • El cheepo on 18/03/2024 - 02:04
            +6

            @msmhw: Ballsy move from a tenant to risk pissing off the people that would be their reference for their next rental…

            What triggered them taking action?
            Did your friend also try to evict them?

            • msmhw on 18/03/2024 - 03:47

              @El cheepo: If you want my opinion, they are were at fault, and the REA is useless and caused a lot of problems.
              From the information I know, REA is not doing a good job with repairs requests such as problem with the moulds and ventilation, water leaks and other stuff. Some of them took over a year or so. My friend wasn't aware of this.

              But in the beginning of the year, he decided to increase the rent to keep up with the market. The tenants weren't happy because of the unfixed repairs requests and they think it's above the market. After negotiation, they agreed on a price. Then, the REA suggested the owner should terminate the contract as the apartment worth much more than what they agreed on. My friend decided to go ahead with the termination. From here, things turned ugly. They weren't happy and demanded the repairs to be fix ASAP. Here where the landlord found about the repairs requests. The REA stated, the all minor repairs and he should not worry about them.

              We think the tenants sought some advice, where they found out about the notices issue and demanded their money back.

              • freefall101 on 18/03/2024 - 11:50
                +4

                @msmhw: This paints the story in a different light, they've lawyered up because they wore $10k worth of rent increases, have lived in a property that wasn't properly repaired and are being booted out.

                The 1 day thing is the lawyer fishing for a loophole and probably won't work. But your mate should be looking for a new real estate agent, you can't just ignore minor repairs and mould/bad ventilation is only going to get worse.

                Good luck to your mate on renting it out again with mould on the condition report too. Although in this market I imagine people will take it on the promise it'll be fixed really soon.

                • CalmLemons on 19/03/2024 - 16:19
                  +1

                  @freefall101: The periods are there to give people ample time. At most VCAT will order for perhaps 1 months of rent increase paid back, given an additional 31 day notice period but to have the whole thing paid back is ludicrous.

                  Sounds like a lawyer wants to make $4-5K and tenant has been made to believe they'll get the other half.

              • Minimum chips on 19/03/2024 - 15:38
                +1

                @msmhw: Sounds like the REA is the enemy of both the tenant and landlord due to their incompetence. Landlord should expain all you've said to the tenant and promptly fire the REA.

                • msmhw on 19/03/2024 - 21:55
                  -2

                  @Minimum chips: the landlord apologized for that and is offering to fix all the repairs required ASAP and issue a new termination notice but the tenants rejected that, they want all their money back.

                  • timmypete on 19/03/2024 - 22:35
                    +3

                    @msmhw:

                    "landlord…is offering to fix all repairs…and issue a new termination notice but the tenants rejected that"

                    On what planet would you expect a tenant to suddenly be happy with being kicked out for a slightly different reason (but still kicked out), or happy that the repairs only kicked in after they were kicked out!?!

                    This seems deluded, and OP's friend should be investing in something that requires less interaction with people.

      • DashCam AKA Rolts on 18/03/2024 - 08:35

        Even if the landlord didn't attend?

        This could go against the Landlord, undefended case brought against them. 🤔

      • Gareth on 18/03/2024 - 10:46
        +1

        I would think it could go much worse if the landlord doesn't defend 'his' actions.

  • try2bhelpful on 18/03/2024 - 01:40
    +5

    This is just crazy. The trouble is if the tribunal looks at the technicality rather than the intention. The trouble is your friend will be in even more difficulty if they try to get rid of these people. Sounds like landlords should put in a margin of error when doing this.

    • El cheepo on 18/03/2024 - 01:46
      +1

      The trouble is your friend will be in even more difficulty if they try to get rid of these people.

      See the lease period out and don’t renew it.
      Easy.

      Sounds like landlords should put in a margin of error when doing this.

      I would be more upset at the REA for not having better systems in place to get the notice periods correct.

      And if it’s a self managed property, theres a nice life lesson about being thorough when it comes to checking paperwork.

      • try2bhelpful on 18/03/2024 - 07:27
        +1

        And when the lease ends the renter will still need to ensure all the boxes are ticked very carefully. If these people are willing to play games now they may well do what they can to prolong the process at the end. They went to a lawyer on this.

        I agree there are lessons to be learnt here but there is also the issue of tenants playing games instead of acting in good faith.

    • timmypete on 18/03/2024 - 07:33
      +17

      I'm not trying to be obnoxious about this, but OP chimed in mid-thread to add that the tenants had raised maintenance of multiple matters, more than a year ago, which remain unfixed. They also mention "their friend" increased rent at the start of the year, and sometime afterwards terminated the lease.

      We're obviously only getting one side of the story here, and ultimately the tribunal will have more info and make an informed call.

      Again, not trying to dunk, but if what appears to be happening is the case I hope investors like this don't stay in the property market. It isn't good for anyone in this situation. This isn't a class statement, but more along the lines that if you're not able to meet the basic requirements (or adequately oversight an agent managing your asset on your behalf) perhaps try shares instead?

    • ThithLord on 18/03/2024 - 15:13
      +3

      Cos investors don't spend the money to fix their sh!thole properties before renting it out at an exorbitant rate? Yep

    • ms_caz on 18/03/2024 - 21:44

      Totally!

    • Rimsy on 19/03/2024 - 15:07
      -2

      Yep. I’ll never be a landlord again. Just not worth the stress. Even worse post covid.

      • Jolakot on 19/03/2024 - 19:32
        +4

        What a shame, the world needs more inefficient middlemen

      • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 19/03/2024 - 20:20
        +2

        Good. 1 less out there.

  • screensaver on 18/03/2024 - 07:40
    +2

    I was given notice of a rent increase and then a new lease. I signed the lease and noticed they had put the old rent on. So legally I didnt have to pay the increase. . But I did

    • DingoBilly on 18/03/2024 - 07:46
      +2

      Why would you though? In the rare case of an error going your way, you should use it to your advantage. The REA doesn't deserve any sympathy, and the owner could hopefully seek compensation from the REA here assuming they messed up.

      • in-place on 18/03/2024 - 08:34
        +4

        because in contract law there is a scenario known as a unilateral mistake - where one party has mistaken the terms of a contract which does not nessecarily see it void.

        The fact that tenant was notified of the increase ahead of time is enough that you would have a hard time proving negligence on the REAs part, either way they should be more careful with their contracts and still don't deserve any sympathy.

        • choosk on 19/03/2024 - 20:53
          +1

          👆 This is the only correct answer .

        • Jolakot on 19/03/2024 - 21:17

          Depends on the state of course, but you would have a very tough time arguing this in VCAT.

          The REA wrote the contract, they are a licenced professional and held to a much greater legal standard than a layperson tenant.

          And unless the rent increase already took effect, then the tenant could easily argue that the discount was an incentive to sign a new lease.

          You're left with the REA arguing that they are incompetent fools in front of the member, which is always a laugh because members are some of the most petty judgemental people out there, and they do not suffer fools.

          Also opens them up to being sued by the landlord if they aren't convincing enough. Rarely worth the gamble.

    • Zeph101 on 18/03/2024 - 14:37

      One of my clients had a similar issue.

      Their Real Estate buggered up the rental increase.
      Tenant ended up only needing to pay what was on the lease. Real Estate then had to "make right" and chip in the difference.

  • elgrande on 18/03/2024 - 08:00

    The answer you are looking for is in the Interpretation Act 1987.

    • xylarr on 18/03/2024 - 17:10

      Well there you go:

      36 Reckoning of time
      (1) If in any Act or instrument a period of time, dating from a given day, act or event, is prescribed or allowed for any purpose, the time shall be reckoned exclusive of that day or of the day of that act or event.
      (2) If the last day of a period of time prescribed or allowed by an Act or instrument for the doing of any thing falls—
      (a) on a Saturday or Sunday, or
      (b) on a day that is a public holiday or bank holiday in the place in which the thing is to be or may be done,
      the thing may be done on the first day following that is not a Saturday or Sunday, or a public holiday or bank holiday in that place, as the case may be.
      (3) If in any Act or instrument a period of time is prescribed or allowed for the doing of any thing and a power is conferred on any person or body to extend the period of time—
      (a) that power may be exercised, and
      (b) if the exercise of that power depends on the making of an application for an extension of the period of time—such an application may be made,
      after the period of time has expired.

      Sooo, IANAL, but it looks like it may not count the first day. Also, if the last day is a weekend or public holiday, the last day is deemed to be the next business day.

  • Dollar General on 18/03/2024 - 08:01

    Delivery day?

    I assume all communication is via email?

  • djsweet on 18/03/2024 - 08:41
    +8

    There is no way a tenant would lawyer up over 1 day in a 60 day notice. My guess is the lawyer was already engaged and dealing with all the other issues mentioned in this thread and is using the notice period as added ammo to put pressure on the defendant. Whether or not they’ll get a technicality like that over the line remains to be seen, but in combination with the other issues they are representing the client on, maybe this helps their case a bit. Fwiw the letter of the law is 60 days not 59.5 days, so if the magistrate is already offside based on other issues your relative/friend may be in for a shock.

  • alxr0101 on 18/03/2024 - 08:47

    you dont count the date of deemed Service.

    And you do not count the date of the Notice…which can be meaningless if dated a week before but they dont bother to send it then.

    As above, Interpretations Act 1987.

    Also refer your Rental Agreement for specific Terms…eg. could be BUSINESS DAYS or business hours.

    Not residential, but I;ve had one clown manchild date a Notice on a Friday but not actually EMAIL it until Saturday 3am..which is the deemed date of NOtice for electronic delivery…..and giving Notice of 7 days but miscounting by including the deemed date of Notice.

    • jv on 18/03/2024 - 09:43
      -1

      eg. could be BUSINESS DAYS or business hours.

      landlord may work 7 days a week.

      • alxr0101 on 18/03/2024 - 10:55

        It's a Standard Form Of Agreement. I was being generic in assessing scenarios.

        Refer the actual fineprint.

        But yes, could be days including Sundays.

    • jv on 18/03/2024 - 09:43

      Maybe tenant cannot afford to buy their own house.

      • Pcosmic on 18/03/2024 - 10:08
        -4

        Beggars can't be choosers

        • jv on 18/03/2024 - 10:16
          +2

          That's my point, and the opposite to yours.

    • OZBMate8911 on 18/03/2024 - 16:55
      +1

      Watch that you don't cut yourself on that edge

  • jv on 18/03/2024 - 09:42
    -1

    If you count the delivery day, it's 60days. But if it's not included, it's 59days.

    Maybe it is 59 days plus GST.

    • El cheepo on 18/03/2024 - 13:10
      +1

      64.9 days?

      • MITM on 18/03/2024 - 15:12

        What if it's sent at 11;59pm ? 1 minute = day 1

  • Euphemistic on 18/03/2024 - 10:53
    +1

    Thats some nitpicking.

  • Gareth on 18/03/2024 - 10:54

    First it's clear the agent messed up here - always, always give extra time. Back in the old days agents used to give 7 days extra time just for the mail to get through.

    If these rent increases were part of a new lease, and notice wasn't given properly, haven't the tenants been living there without a valid lease? You can't just say I think this is wrong and pick on just one condition as invalid.

    If I was the landlord, I'd probably admit to the court that this wasnt good enough and offer a refund of the difference for 1 weeks rent per time this has happened. {which isn't going to add up to that much}

    • jv on 18/03/2024 - 11:01
      -1

      If I was the landlord, I'd probably admit to the court that this wasnt good enough and offer a refund of the difference for 1 weeks rent per time this has happened. {which isn't going to add up to that much}

      and on top of that, I wouldn't renew their lease when it ends.

    • JimmyF on 18/03/2024 - 11:13

      If I was the landlord, I'd probably admit to the court that this wasnt good enough and offer a refund of the difference for 1 weeks rent per time this has happened. {which isn't going to add up to that much}

      I believe this would be the best outcome that the tenant could expect as well. The fact the tenant is claiming the rent increase is void for the entire period isn't really going to fly as they had been 'advised' the increase was coming, just 1 day short before the new rate kicked in. 59 days vs 60 days.

      The best they could do is extend the older rent rate by a few days to cover the notice period missed or offer a week to ensure the notice period was fully covered.

      Also a lesson in it for the RE, ensure at least 61 days notice is given in the future.

      But even so, lets say this happened 3 times, and the differance was $150/wk each time, its only $450 all up.

      Could go worse and they give them 2 days of reduced rent for each time, so using the figures above its ~$130.

      LOL, either outcome isn't worth the hassle.

    • Gareth on 18/03/2024 - 11:51

      I'd probably be giving the agent the boot too.

      Not passing on details of defects is inexcusable - the landlord needs to know and make the decision of when to fix stuff, not be left in the dark with a understandably annoyed tenant.

  • Drakesy on 18/03/2024 - 11:30

    Some people…

  • archiexyz on 18/03/2024 - 12:11
    +2

    My latest rent increase notice based on the template (for VIC) has the following

    "12. Delivery of this notice
    • The notice period begins the day after the renter is estimated to receive this notice.
    • If sending by post, the rental provider must allow for the delivery time in calculating the increase date.
    • If sending by registered post, the rental provider should keep evidence of the mail delivery method used to send this notice.
    This notice has been sent on DD MM YYYY

  • MITM on 18/03/2024 - 15:20

    Tenant should have sent breech notices to the REA after 7 days of non-remedy of issues. Tenant is probably using a Tenants' Union/Advocate (funded by the interest earned on bond monies.)

    • ar7ist on 19/03/2024 - 14:26

      I had the deal with a mould issue myself as a tenant, because when I notified the REA, they just told me to clean it with vinegar.

      • EBC on 19/03/2024 - 16:45

        I had a similar issue where literally everything in my apartment was moulding. Furniture, clothes, carpet, walls, etc. I told the landlord about it and he offered me a generous $5 off per week. I ended up getting out of the lease after about 7 months.

        There are bad actors on both sides of the landlord-tenant relationship but man have I rented from some dodgy landlords.

  • Deals For Days on 19/03/2024 - 16:24

    Ah, of course it comes out that there are a bunch of outstanding issues with the rental that were never repaired/fixed.

    Doubt a tribunal would bother with the 1 day thing but if they've been paying for months to have mould etc. then your 'friend' is gonna have an issue i suspect.

  • z0s0 on 19/03/2024 - 18:46
    +1

    Yep all of the overpaid rent will be deemed to have been in error and the tribunal will order for the entirety to be repaid to the tenant(s). It's a very simple case; the notice of rent increase was invalid, and therefore had no effect. i.e. there was no rent increase.

  • c9 on 19/03/2024 - 22:05

    March has 31 days so I counted 60/61 days, not 59/60.

    • msmhw on 19/03/2024 - 22:13
      -1

      It was jus an example, I don't recall the exact dates. But the issue is if the delivery date should be included or not

  • DarkOz on 20/03/2024 - 09:45

    WTF. Too many silly people playing silly games.

    If I was the landlord I would just add 1 more day to the termination notice and if I was the tenant I would just accept it as it is.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join