The Worst Hostel in Australia: Canberra City YHA

Canberra City YHA is quite possibly the worst hostel in Australia. A fan of Bad Landlord has written in with a litany of complaints about the hostel. With the current poor housing market, people are finding accommodation where they can. They are staying at hostels if they cannot find other more secure forms of housing. 

When I first moved to Canberra for a job, I stayed at the Canberra City YHA for a few months. The gloss wore off very quickly.

• The hostel is completely over priced. The price per night for a 10-bunk dormitory can be as much as $40 per night. For other comparable hostels in other states, the going rate would be about $20 per night. Plus breakfast is not complimentary. You have to pay for it. 
• The pricing is dodgy. The price per night can change from day to day with no adequate explanation. In my time there, the pricing for a 10-bunk dormitory fluctuated between $30 and $40. There are many people staying there on a long-term basis. They are not offered a reduced rate. 
• When booking accommodation, reception will routinely quote more than the available online price. The practice is completely dodgy. The way they treat international visitors is disgusting. There can be a considerable difference in what they are quoted (up to $100 for long stays).
• The manager will leave notes on your account. This is always checked by staff members when you book accommodation. I am not sure but I think the manager leaves instructions on what to charge you. If they are doing this, it's probably illegal. There is no transparency or accountability. 
• They are breaking the law. Under Australian Consumer Law, businesses must provide receipts. They don't give people receipts, let along itemised receipts. They get away with doing this because most customers are from overseas. If you book for a block of time, you can't see what you are paying per night. 
• The staff treat people staying there with complete contempt. Complaints are not an opportunity for improvement. There is no such thing as customer service at the Canberra City YHA. This is probably because they have a monopoly on the market - there are only two hostels in Canberra.
• According to YHA policy, there are restrictions on long stays. However, people often stay on an ongoing basis because accommodation options in Canberra are so limited. The policy is only applied if you piss off management. If you complain, you run the risk of being evicted. People are often evicted for arbitrary reasons sometimes with no notice. For example, paying 'rent' a few hours late.
• The hostel asks for a $1 contribution to the sustainable hostel fund for 'eco-projects'. I did not see any special projects but I did see them install new curtains. How dodgy is this. They probably use this for ongoing maintenance that they should be funding out of their profit margin. 
• No one uses the pool or the spa advertised as a 'sauna and spa and wellness centre' because they aren't heated (unless they are completely nuts! Canberra is freezing at the best of times).
• I signed up to be a member years ago and I paid a fee to access a discount. Upon arrival, I was told that the system had changed and people were automatically members. I would have loved a refund. 
• The hostel advertises a nightclub DJ and live music/performance. There is a bar next door and it is run completely separately. There is no social director like what you would find at other decent hostels. The third floor balcony is great but they kick you out at 10pm every night. 
• A young lady was sexually assaulted on the premises while I was there. Still in shock, she went and reported this matter to reception. Instead of calling the police to have the perpetrator arrested, they kicked him out! He was located and charged by the police at a later date. 
• I was asleep in my dormitory once. I woke up and my belongings were gone. The staff had had broken into all of the lockers using a bolt cutter to take off the padlocks. They didn't even wake me up to check which locker was mine! It felt like a complete violation of my privacy. 
• The hostel charges for storage. Unbelievable. I have travelled the world and I have not encountered a hostel or hotel that charges for something this basic. It's expensive and there are no other options/solutions for people who stay there on an ongoing basis. About $9 per day on top of accommodation. This caused heaps of problems for me because I worked and stayed somewhere else on a part-time basis. 
• One time they threw out my food. About $20 worth. I can't remember if I had labelled my food but there were unopened items like coffee. I went and complained. They didn't give a shit. They didn't even offer to give me credit. 
• There are ongoing issues with the heating. Heating is critical in Canberra because it can get as low as minus five degrees. They either don't have heating (air conditioning only) or they don't supply heating to the large dormitories. I saw people going to bed in their jackets and beanies. They don't even supply extra blankets. 
• The staff. A mix of inexperience and incompetence. But a few happy smiling faces. I think the problems stem from management/ownership to be honest. 
• One time the washing machine ate my gold coins. Do you think I could get a refund? No. Not possible. She said and I quote, 'I don't owe you anything'. 
• The hostel has been around for a long time and is run down. It definitely needs to be renovated. To be fair though, they keep it relatively clean. 
• The reviews. Don't trust them. They're fake. 

Vote with your feet. Don't book there. You have options. The other hostel Dickson Central is in Dickson. If you are traveling as part of a group, you can book an Executive apartment for about $100 per night. You can also book relatively cheap stays on AirBnB. 

😡😡😡

Residential tenancy laws do not regulate hostels. For people living in hostels because they have no choice, there are implications for their legal rights. There is no security of tenure. The hostel policy applies. Is this a gap? Should the law change? 

While policies may state otherwise, the actual practice of permitting long-term stays may create a reasonable expectation that the service may continue. The argument could certainly be made that guests staying on a continuous basis should be entitled to some form of protection. 

It would seem unfair that guests staying on a long-term basis (not night to night) can be evicted at will. Particularly considering that homelessness may result.

It's definitely food for thought...

Unstable landlord from Torrensville: Centrelink being defrauded

This is a story about an unstable landlord from Torrensville who uses his tenants to defraud Centrelink. The landlord in this instance cannot be named because the tenant fears further harassment and retribution.

The landlord never gave rent receipts to his tenants because his didn’t want Centrelink to find out about the extra income. If there were a database of rental properties, the agency would be able to link in and check these things.

This is what the tenant had to say: 

 

I am in Adelaide and currently having an issue with an ex-landlord in Torrensville who is taking me to court about bond he claims I need to pay him back for - he never lodged the bond with anyone.
 

This was a lodging arrangement (6 years tenancy) and he never gave me rent receipts and is attempting to claim money back for various ridiculous items including doing improvements and repairs on his own property. Incidentally, there was never a written lease, just a verbal agreement.
 

At present it is a monumental waste of my time (I will have my third court directions hearing in Feb) but I concede I have learned a significant amount about the legal process and the depths that some people will stoop for money. This guy is an invalid pensioner and has tenants in his house that he doesn't declare to Centrelink (hence he also doesn't provide receipts). It is surprising that he would make himself open to scrutiny in this way, but I suspect his comeuppance is about to occur. 
 

The landlord failed in his duty to provide receipts for rent for the entire period of tenancy (as is stipulated by Section 58 of the Residential Tenancy Act). He insisted that all rent be paid in cash and did not allow me to pay by cheque or deposit as he did not want Centrelink to be able to trace his income.
 

The interesting thing is that the tenant was successful in arguing that section 58

of the Residential Tenancies Act 1995 (SA) was breached. In most states and territories, tenants have a right to rent receipts to prove they paid if the landlord claims they did not. Pretty common sense. It’s there to protect tenants.

But strictly speaking, if the judge had found that the tenant had boarded with the landlord and had not entered into a lease she would not have won. Under section 5(b) of the Act, boarding and lodging arrangements are not covered by the Act.

Accordingly, people in this situation do not have the protection of the Act including the right to rental receipts. And there is no reason in principle why boarders and lodgers should not be entitled to rental receipts. This is very bad law.  
 

Also note that landlords can be fined a maximum of $2,500 for failing to provide rent receipts in South Australia. I would really like to know what is going on because I have not heard of any landlord getting a fine of this magnitude.

The tenant also explained how the landlord made his tenants pay for electricity as a way of hiding income. She continues:
 

The plaintiff’s initial claim for $1200 for rent in arrears on the 16/12/12 (and again on 7/1/13) was paid by the defendant on 22/1/13 (minus bond) with no mention of other monies owing (including electricity and withholding of bond) until 21/8/13.
 

Without explanation, the amount ‘owed’ for electricity has risen from $150 in the original claim to $188 in the most recent claim. The plaintiff obliges his tenants to pay the entire electricity bill without contributing monies himself as a way of hiding income and avoiding the loss of benefits from Centrelink.
 

Although never formally agreeing to comply, and at times spending little time at the residence, the defendant estimates over $5000 was paid in electricity during her six-year tenancy and is reluctant to contribute further.
 

The defendant spent very little time in the residence in the three month period of the bill in question, with ten days spent in China in late November and days spent away from the residence due to fear of the plaintiff from early December.

This is blatantly unfair. Tenants are being exploited because they need somewhere to live.

In the next instalment, we will explore how this landlord threatened and intimidated his tenants.

Bugger off! I pay for privacy...

Hopefully, you the reader would know that tenants are entitled to quiet enjoyment. It's a somewhat archaic term that should probably be replaced with the term 'privacy'.

The term is a bit confusing. I remember being told once by a real estate agent when I was a young law student that quiet enjoyment meant no loud music. Of course, I knew this not to be true. I don't want to bore you with the legalities of quiet enjoyment, but here we go...

There are differences between jurisdictions. The Victorian Act only refers to the right of quiet enjoyment. The Queensland Act on the other hand says tenants are entitled to reasonable peace, comfort, and privacy. This approach is much more advanced.

The concept of quiet enjoyment has been interpreted by the Courts in a restrictive manner, probably because the Acts are not explicit enough. Landlords and agents have made significant inroads leaving tenants with little substantive protection. 

To better protect tenants, we really need to work out what kind of privacy tenants need. And if landlords or agents breach those rules, we must throw the book at them. For something to be respected, it must have a value.

A fan wrote in and told me about their nosy landlord. The landlord would enter the property unannounced and sneak around under the house listening to their private conversations. He was eventually caught. The landlord would also challenge their guests while they were waiting out the front asking questions about who they are and what they were doing. That's just not good enough.

I remember back to the days of property law and the boring lectures about easements, covenants, and fixtures. They would have been a lot more interesting and exciting if we actually looked at the policy issues. Why? Because damn the man...

 

Public Warning: Monster on the loose…

A young man has contacted Bad Landlord Australia wanting to warn others of a predator targeting international students. His real name is Phillip but he goes by the pseudonym Richard Puller. This man lives in St Kilda, Victoria.

Misaki, a young student from Japan, found an advertisement on Gumtree for a cheap furnished room on Barkly Street. This is not her real name. Misaki moved in but managed to escape after four days with the help of concerned friends.

Misaki was cluey enough to tape some of the conversations with Phillip. I have listened to the recordings but I am unable to publish them because it is prohibited in Victoria. Victoria Police and Consumer Affairs Victoria have been notified.

It is very difficult listening to the recordings. It is truly disturbing stuff. This sixty-year old man tries to groom Misaki telling her she is special, a princess, his special friend, and so it goes on. He offers her reduced rent for god knows what, which she refuses.

The class hallmark of a molester is keeping the abuse under wraps. He repeatedly tells her that the relationship is secret. Disturbingly, it sounds like he has done this kind of thing many times before. He refers to another Japanese girl that had stayed with him previously.

Here is an account by the white knight that rescued Misaki:

My girlfriend is from Japan. She recently had her friend come from Japan to live here in Australia. My girlfriend was helping her find a place, found this ad and took her friend to met Philip aka “Richard Puller” and they decided it was okay for her to move in (mainly because there was another Japanese girl staying there). The moment she was alone with him which was the first day, he bought her clothes and told her to get changed in front of him, he continued to be sleazy trying to kiss her saying he loves her and when she wouldn’t do things he would slam door and get angry.

Luckily Misaki recorded many conversations he had with her. The recordings are well beyond grooming, controlling sexual things that made me want to vomit. “Rent goes down if you do what I say”, “we will have a special secret friendship”, “you have nice boobs and I love you and we will have good special friendship if you don’t tell people about us” etc. Complete sexual predator! I have made a statement about this but they weren’t sure about how they could handle it, as he didn’t rape her pretty much. I immediately took Misaki away from this creep, she only stayed there for four days and already all this happened. 

The other girl living there is scared of him and hides in her room. She is leaving because of him. I told she can stay with me and my girlfriend and now Misaki just to help her escape. I have spoken to people that have heard of this man and said he always has Asian girls stay with him. Obviously he preys on WEAK scared venerable Asian women so nothing probably would have been reported. These girls cry themselves to sleep every night and then just flee home scared with this as their main memory of Australia. These girls wouldn’t go to the police you see. It makes me sick. All I pray for is that no more travelling Asian girls can walk into this trap. If this man is not stopped it will definitely end in rape.

The difficulty is that the Residential Tenancies Act 1997 does not deal with situations like this. Anyone can become a landlord, there are no restrictions. To protect vulnerable people, property owners should have to apply to the regulator to rent out their place. We need to safeguard the public.

 

 

Using defamation laws to fight back

It was recognised early on that tenant databases could be abused so governments intervened and started to regulate. In Queensland under the Residential Tenancies and Rooming Accommodation Act 2008 tenants can only be listed in certain defined circumstances.

But the legislation is sometimes ineffective and fails to protect tenants in dire circumstances. Sarah would like to share her story because she is "devastated there aren’t harsher penalties for people like this". Please note that fake names have been used to protect the anonymity and privacy of the tenants at their request.

Mary is an older lady and she seemed fine when we first went to look at the property. We rented the property a few weeks later and signed a 12 month lease. A few months down the track she became the landlord from hell, coming round without notice, banging on the door on a Sunday, picking mandarins off our mandarin tree in the garden and also making numerous rude comments about us being in her eyes "poor".

It got extremely bad when me and my partner lost our jobs 2 days apart and had our 2 year old son to support as well as the bills piling up. I was stressed and depressed. We fell behind on rent and struggled to even eat. We rang Mary to explain our situation and said she was welcome to have our bond and we were trying to get housing and jobs as soon as possible.

Her exact words were "you will be on the street you and your son". She hired a lawyer and a real estate agency. I cried that night so distressed by our bad situation and how someone could be so cruel. Sure enough the next day we received a letter stating we needed to vacate the property.  

My partner found another job and we were able to get a rental property out of town as we were unable to get one in our hometown as she had informed us she had told agencies not to rent from us. We moved out a week later. And to our surprise we received court forms totalling around $4000 as not only did Mary want her rent back she wanted payment for damages and compensation! Luckily the court case ended and she only received the rent we owed which got taken out of our bond and with our bond there was still $1,370 owing (this was including court costs).  

The judge made the order they got the bond and we just had to pay Mary back the $1,370 how ever way we wanted. We started up a $5 a month payment plan which isn’t a lot at all but was all we could afford. We then received harassing letters saying if we didn’t pay $100 a week we would be blacklisted. Obviously in our situation this was an enormous amount we couldn’t afford. We let them know we couldn’t afford it and all she could say was "sorry, owners request, if you don’t pay what she wants you blacklisted".

Surely enough we received in the mail a letter informing us we are blacklisted on TICA. We still receive harassing letters and Facebook messages. We are harassed when we go out in public and can’t move on with our lives. We can’t get on with our lives and have even been forced to start processing bankruptcy just so we will be left alone. Mary told us she wants to see us on the street with our young child and no money. I am going to try and take out an AVO if anything happens again.    

The first thing to note is that the landlord and agent broke the law. The Residential Tenancies and Rooming Accommodation Regulations 2009 states a tenant can be listed if there has been a tribunal order for the payment of money AND the time for payment has passed. The agent would have known this but went ahead regardless and blacklisted this family who had fallen on hard times.

This case also highlights the difficulties families experience trying to pay bills in the private rental market when a job has fallen through and they are thrust onto Centrelink well-being support which is manifestly inadequate.

It also shows that legislation needs to be extended to cover informal blacklisting. This is a problem in the regional areas particularly small towns. As in this case, all the landlord needs to do is go for a walk around town and chat to real estate agents.

In this scenario, the family sued Mary for defamation. I don't know how successful they were, but it is one tool tenants can use to right the injustices of the current system.

 

Lesson learned: Don't assume your agent is professional...

This is a story about a seemingly "professional" real estate agency, and I use the word loosely. A fan of Bad Landlord Australia wrote in wanting to share her parent's experience vacating a property down south.

My parents were tenants of a house in New South Wales through a Queensland-based real estate agent. My parents gave the real estate agent the required notice to end the tenancy, and subsequent to this, the real estate agent provided my parents with a detailed list of things that my parents were required to do upon ending the tenancy, with particular focus on professionally cleaning the carpet. Note that my parents did not own a pet. 

The tenancy notice issued to my parents insisted that my parents pay for the carpet to be professionally cleaned, and in addition informed them that dry cleaning was not acceptable, that self-cleaning by the hiring of a machine was not acceptable, and even named a particular carpet cleaning company that they did not regard as having an acceptable standard of cleaning. 

I did a little research on my parents’ behalf, and found that this request was in breach of the Residential Tenancy Act 2010. Section 19(2) prohibits the inclusion of terms requiring professional carpet cleaning at the end of a lease.

I informed my parents of their obligations under the Act, and my parents then mentioned the legislation regarding carpet cleaning to the agent. The agent quickly agreed that they did not need to have the carpet professionally cleaned. I think the agent may have been trying their luck, and counting on my parents not checking up on the current tenancy legislation.

I am concerned that this agent has other tenants who may not be aware of their rights. I suspect the agent may have asked other tenants to professionally clean their carpets at the end of their tenancies, and if the agent is flouting this part of the law, I assume there may be other sections of the law the agent is not adhering to.

What can be done to make sure that tenants are aware of their rights, and to ensure that real estate agents don't try and break the law? Some people just believe whatever the agent tells them, as they assume the agent is professional enough to know the legislation regarding tenancies.

The reality is that it is too easy for agents and landlords to get away with this sort of thing, without any repercussions even if they are caught out. Agencies such as this should be investigated and fined in cases like this to deter them from doing the same thing in the future.

It is also interesting that the real estate agency blacklisted a particular cleaning service. I have heard of cases where contractors who express concerns about unethical conduct have been blacklisted and are no longer given any work.

So what is the lesson learned? Know your rights and responsibilities and don't assume that your agent is telling the truth. They represent the rights and interests of landlords which do not necessarily coincide with yours. Be suspicious and prepared.

 

 

Warning: Tenants being exposed to asbestos

Tenants have little specific rights when it comes to asbestos. If asbestos is suspected, tenants could take the matter to court arguing urgent repairs. And I'm pretty sure a court would grant a request to vacate the property even if the lease hasn't expired.
 
The situation is a little different in the Australian Capital Territory because of the MR Fluffy asbestos scare. Landlords are required to provide an asbestos assessment report, failing that, an asbestos advice under the Dangerous Substances Act 2004. But how is this provision to be enforced if the tenants simply aren't aware?

One concerned tenant wrote in wanting to tell his story and warn over tenants. He has dobbed in John Serafini (company name, Serafini Chains) in Bowen Hills, Queensland.

Myself and my wife have been living in a rental property under a cash arrangement for 2 1/2 years in Bowen Hills. We had a cupboard where we have kept our pots, pans, things we use to put food in for the time we have lived here.

We recently became aware that the broken sheet inside the cupboard is made of asbestos. Small pieces of this same broken sheet are dropping from the underside of the floor on to the garage floor under the flat we live in. There is a good chance that this broken sheet would have been touching things we eat from, I also replaced the bench top above it possibly exposing myself further.

I have been in contact with the asbestos-related disease society and submitted exposure forms for me and my wife. To reduce future incidences of asbestos-related disease in the Australian community, something needs to be done.

I believe that me and my wife have been exposed to asbestos or at least put at risk by it. What about the next tenant here? These owners wouldn't pay for anything to be fixed even if they did have the money. We are vacating the rental and don't want others to have the same problem and potential exposure to a banned and known cancer-causing product. 

The author of this blog post is not an expert in asbestos, so she contacted the Asbestos Council of Victoria:

On the info you have given me, it is hard to say what exposure the family has had – but probably there is exposure – how much? – anyone’s guess. Will they get sick from the exposure? There is no way to know or quantify that. They may never get anything wrong with them. It is Russian Roulette with exposure to asbestos fibres. Of course the more exposure you get the more chances you are taking. You should never allow yourself to be exposed it is the only way to make sure you never present with an asbestos-related disease.  

Of course in saying that I do know of cases where someone who had had only a small known exposure had contracted mesothelioma. God willing they will all be okay. As for the rental place, the owner has a duty of care to make sure that the place is safe to rent and asbestos that is broken or old and deteriorating needs to be taken care of in a rental situation. Asbestos cement sheet that is in good condition and painted and sealed is not a problem. If the house is with a real estate agent the agent needs to make sure the owner has done his duty of care in keeping the house in good condition.

So we can't know for sure in this situation, but the best thing to do is avoid asbestos as much as you can.

Should landlords be criminally charged if they lease properties which are known to be infected with asbestos? This was happening before the ACT Government decided to release the addresses of all Mr Fluffy homes. 

 

If tenants are being exposed to asbestos, this is a massive health risk and should be dealt with appropriately.
 

Tenants would be better protected if inspections were mandatory and landlords were prohibited from leasing asbestos-infected properties to unsuspecting tenants. They should be responsible for paying a licensed assessor if asbestos is later suspected and for compensating tenants for moving costs.

 

If you think you have been exposed to asbestos, you can

• contact your local asbestos-related disease support society; and
• register your exposure with the Maurice Blackburn national asbestos register.

Right to a professional handy man

Some dodgy landlords refuse to hire professional handymen, doing the work themselves, hiring mates or second-rate tradies. Of course, they do this to reduce costs and save money on carrying out repairs.

But there are a number of problems with doing this. First of all, it can be dangerous depending on the kind of work being done. When it comes to electrical work for instance, you want someone who knows what they are doing.

Secondly, it is violates the privacy of tenants. A key element of a lease is the right to quiet enjoyment of the property. If the landlord is doing the work, they get to do an informal inspection without the protections in the Act.

And further, if there is a problem and the matter goes before a tribunal, the landlord has an edge because their mate will probably give a favourable version of the events.

And then there's the hassle. If they don't know what they are doing, it might take longer and they might have to come back.

This is why tenants should have a right to a professional handyman.

Here is a story from a frustrated tenant:

I have a tale of woe to tell. My family and I moved into our dodgy Northcote property two years ago. I knew it was dodgy as I had the pleasure of living in another property owned by the same man when I was a young student.

He was a dodgy prick then and remains one today. Why did I take the property, well der, there is a shortage of three bedroom rentals and my kids need to be near schools transport and so on. Anyway on our first night in the house water poured through the ceiling from the upstairs bathroom into the kitchen. The landlord owns half of Northcote.

For those of you who know the area never rent the houses in Butler street behind the Peacock hotel. The landlords answer to our leaking shower was to send his geriatric worker to carry out repairs. The old guy who has little English has been working on the house for two years as the landlord refuses to engage a plumber who is not his mate. Now this weekend has been shocking.

It has started all over again and it is worse than ever and I am just about at my breaking point. Our rent is due on Tuesday, but I don't really want to pay for a house where I cannot take a shower. I have contacted my property manager. I know that the landlord Andy is going to turn up on my door tomorrow with his old guy. My intent is to not let them in and demand a real worker.

I don't know how the story ends. Hopefully she wasn't evicted for standing her ground. 

But the tenant makes a good point. Why should tenants continue to pay rent when they are not receiving the services they pay for? Tenants should have the right to withhold rent if their landlord abuses their power and does the wrong thing.

Fairer Safer Housing

The Victorian Labor Government is moving to reform the Residential Tenancies Act 1987.

They are like to take a targeted approach rather than "root and branch" reform. This is unfortunate. The problems are deserving of forensic attention.

Here is a list of things I would do:

1. Look to Queensland for inspiration. Their system isn't perfect but a great deal better than Victoria's mess. 

2. Create a separate statutory body responsible for all things housing. I hear good things about the Queensland's Residential Tenancies Authority. I'm not convinced housing is a consumer problem. And I don't think dodgy landlords are an enforcement priority.

3. Set up a register for landlords. Carry out background checks. We need to know who they are and take away their rights if they do the wrong thing. Keep a record of bond claims to make sure the money is going where they say it's going.
 

4. Enshrine a right of appeal. I've heard disturbing stories about VCAT's handling of tenancy disputes ranging from outright bias to errors of law. Tenants should not have to go to the Supreme Court to get a good quality judicial decision.

Here is a perspective from a tenant whose first language isn't English:

No fines, low compensation. If I resume yesterday's hearing, a landlord has the right not to do repairs and to treat you like shit...so why do they have laws??? The thing is I'm petrified when I talk to the tribunal and to the landlord so I can't express what I want to say. I even forgot I had a notice to vacate! 

The notice to vacate as been cancelled but the landlord hasn't been fined for abusing it! Out of the over $10,000 I asked for compensation (I did "over ask" on purpose) I will get $77!!! Even though I pointed out that the real estate agency abused their power, didn't respect the RT act etc, they got away with NO FINE! Conclusion: I am really pissed off!

5. Give tenants an enforceable right to safety. Make carbon monoxide detectors mandatory. Get inspectors out there checking houses for faults. Give them the power to fine landlords who do the wrong thing.

 

6. Do a human right analysis. Residential tenancy laws were enacted before the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities 2006 was enacted. Get rid of open inspections for a start. They're a complete violation of privacy.

7. Move away from regulating contracts to regulating housing. It's an important distinction. Begin to standardise laws across different kinds of housing. Why should people renting caravans have less rights than other kinds of tenants?

8. Legislate for minimum standards. Tenants pay for and expect housing that ticks all the boxes i.e. heating, ventilation, waterproofing etc. Is it not too much to ask? Inspect houses before they are leased and don't annoy tenants. Make landlords pay for telephone/internet sockets and TV antennae ports. Why should tenants pay? It is the landlord that owns the property and benefits from these things being installed.

9. Give tenants security of tenure. And flexibility for when the unexpected strikes. Not everyone has secure ongoing employment. I don't know about you, but I can't predict what will happen in three years. Compensation for moving costs would also be great.
 

10. Implement time limits for repairs. Even New Zealand has done it. Everyone's sick of waiting. It's seriously not that hard....

 

Renting out? Show some respect...

LGBTQI people continue to experience harassment and abuse simply because of who they are, sometimes this prejudice comes from landlords and letting agents. 

Transgender people may find themselves renting from openly intolerant or disrespectful landlords. At a time when they most need a supportive, welcoming environment, these tenants will be placed at risk of abuse.

This is illustrated by the following example. An Aussie landlord decided it was okay to ask his young transgender tenant completely inappropriate questions.

I just wanted to share something that happened to a friend of mine who recently moved up to Brisbane. My friend is a young Transgender woman in her early 20's and, unless she mentioned it, you would never know. In this case she decided to be upfront purely because she is a very honest person, the result was pretty disgusting. 

I wish I could name and shame the landlord but my friend prefers not to say who, but I would like to still post this to show the attitude of some people who seem to think that when a person is Transgender, they give up their right to be treated with respect and shown a level of dignity. Transgender people are not freaks, they are not peadophiles nor sexual perverts, they are normal people trying to live their life true to themselves.

Even though landlords and their agents perform an important public function, they are not required to undertake training on diversity. Landlords don't have to undertake any training at all, despite the impact they can have on the lives of their tenants.

 

The Property Services Training Package (CPP07) is a set of nationally endorsed qualifications and competency standards. In Victoria, for example, the Certificate IV in Property Services (Real Estate) prescribed by the Business Licensing Authority is based on that framework.

 

While there is some recognition of the importance of diversity in the national framework - it could be better, the Real Estate Institute of Victoria (REIV) in its overview of the 24 units doesn't even mention diversity let alone equal opportunity for the LGBTQI community or any other minority.

 

The private rental sector should be a safe space for all, including members of the LGBTQI community. Here are some pointers for landlords and letting agents:

• Don't ask your tenants if they are gay - first of all because it's none of your business and second they might be concerned about discrimination
• If you are unsure of what pronouns to use - for example "him" or "her" - follow their lead and see what language they prefer
• Don't ask your tenant about their sex organs or sexual practices - transgender or not - it's rude and unacceptable
• If you're not sure how to refer to your tenant's partner, instead of using the "friend" euphemism, ask what term they prefer 
• If you want to show your support - place a sign in your window saying "The LGBTQI community is welcome here" or better yet "We support marriage equality"

Members of the LGBTQI community are equally deserving of our respect. A little sensitivity goes a long way.

Tenancy laws: Not worth the paper they are written on

Tenancy laws are so badly drafted they are not worth the paper they are written on. The loopholes are so big dump trucks could drive through them. In this story, the tenant was evicted only two months after moving into the rental property.

Under section 86 of the NSW Residential Tenancies Act, a landlord can terminate a lease prior to the end of a fixed term contract if the premises are to be sold. The tenant was aghast when told there would be weekly open houses and photos would be published online.

Two months after signing a new lease for my current rental property, it was put up for sale. I have no problem with the real estate bringing potential buyers through the property but the agent is insisting on conducting open house inspections for anyone who wants to haphazardly waltz through my home for 4 Saturdays in a row between 10-10.30am.

He also insisted that on Monday, he will be coming into my home to take photos of the inside of my property to whack all over the internet for advertising purposes. I also have been granted permission to have tenants in the granny flat at the back of the property. All the photos being taken and the continuous open house inspections are really invading their privacy as well.  

I raised these issues with the agent. His response was: "I have always done open house inspections and taken internal photos on all houses I sell. I intend on doing it, and if you don't like it, feel free to give 3 weeks notice and move out." 

I don't deserve this. I am a good tenant with good references and a brilliant rental history. My property is always clean and tidy and my rent is always paid well and truly in advance.

The use of images of tenants' possessions without permission is prohibited only in Queensland and Tasmania. In other jurisdictions, tenancy legislation does not specifically prohibit the taking of photographs.

While tenants have a right to quiet enjoyment, landlords also have a right to access in defined circumstances. It is unclear whether agents can take photos of the premises inclusive of tenants' possessions.

The tenant eventually convinced the agent not to publish the photos but discovered some pretty interesting information.

The real estate has actually now agreed that they will not do the internal photography. But the latest info I have is that the landlord actually did this exact same thing to the last tenant.

The landlord had the house for sale and took it off the market while he got a new tenant signed and then later re-listed it for sale. It turns out that my asshole landlord is a repeat offender. The proof is right there. The great thing is agents cannot remove this info.

Since this new evidence came to my attention, I have now requested that the landlord now reduce my rent by 30% from the date that it was re-listed. And also that the landlord pay my relocation costs. They have refused so it is now a matter for tribunal and with the evidence I have I will certainly win hands down.

By pretending he was selling the property, he could lawfully show the property twice a week. If it were to be rented, it could only be shown in the last fourteen days. See section 55 of the NSW Residential Tenancies Act.
 

Information is power. Historical information about rental properties is available online. Tenants can obtain free property profile reports from Onthehouse.com.au. Another good website is Myrpdata.com. The site costs money but it provides more detailed information 

You can find out:

• when property is bought
• when property is sold
• when property is available to rent
• when property secured a tenant
• when tenant moved out
• when property unlisted or relisted for sale
• managing agents
• sales price for property
• how much property is rented for each week
   

See more:

Jane Lee, ‘Tenants' privacy concerns prompt review into photographing sale properties’ (The Age, 6 August 2014)