ACT Canberra - a fun place to be a landlord

New ACT Legislative Assembly motion seeks to allow prospective renters to request a landlord reference - ABC News

 

Any tenant asking for a landlord reference is a major red flag and thanks to the legislation all those tenants would be flagging themselves - definitely a pro-landlord legislation!

 

I heard that this morning - WTF?

Should the managing agent be providing the reference instead? They're often to blame for deflecting the tenant's request but the owner "hasn't responded/declined" yet is more than willing to get the request actioned.

 

Why?

Wouldn’t you want to know if your prospective landlord was very slow to do any necessary repairs or respond to problems?

There are horror tenants out there, but also horror landlords.

 

I wonder who that smart cookie was sitting there going ... "If we do this it will really bring about some effective change"

 

LOL...who would provide this reference ?

The PM who is paid by them ? Self-prepared ? Let me guess its then a additional $110 a year charged by the PM for a letter that says "The landlord is attentive to tenant requests"...even when they arent. What a joke. Cant believe these air bandits are paid by taxpayers.

 

The picture of the 18 year old elected representative who got the idea from tiktok...We need to thin the layers of government and have a IQ minimum to keep some out. I could write a list. Palmer, Kelly......

Why note a legislated requirement to act "promptly" to requests for repairs and maintenance or the tenant has greater rights to perform them and deduct the cost from rent they pay. Thats better than a note from your mum.

 

bwahahahahahaha!

Lowest vacancy rates in history, soaring rents, and this is what Tenants are concerned about? lololololol

 

The initial perception of seeking such a reference will be perceived as a red flag; it's the normalization of the act that will give way to it being rolled out across the country.

The institutions, which were originally created to serve everyone, have been captured by the ideology of oppressed vs oppressor and it's only going to get worse.

 

Vote wisely at the next election, folks. Vote for parties that advocate for smaller government. Legislation like this is what we deserve when we continually vote in big government parties.

 

Just out of curiosity, why this is a red flag?

 

As a landlord there's a few things that I want from a tenant. I want them to pay the rent on time, take good care of the property and not make unreasonable requests or be a headache. In return I'm happy to provide them with a decent property and I will respond promptly respond to all reasonable maintenance requests.

Asking for a rental reference is a strong sign that they're going to try to play the rules in their favour and are more likely to be difficult to deal with. Higher chance of having to go to tribunal (which is at the landlords expense), higher chance of the tenant being malicious (tenant might loose a few dollars in bond, landlord could be 10 times that out of pocket for repairs). There's plenty of stories around about tenants wanting substantial upgrades that weren't in the original lease, as well as other 'repairs' that are not reasonable.

If there's multiple applications for a property (and it is a tight market at the moment so landlords can often be picky), a landlord is going to go with the one that they feel represents the least risk to them. Don't bother crying 'discrimination', it's quite legit for the landlord to simply say they didn't feel good about the application even if they don't have a better alternative.

 

Id say for the majority of tenants it's a similar story. They just want to be able to live their lives in relative peace, know that the property will be maintained, and not have unreasonable demands/claims against them to cover costs which they shouldn't be responsible for.

Or it could just mean they had a bad past experience with a dodgy landlord or PM and want to know the next one will be different.

I guess I just find it strange that people would be so upset at a landlord being asked for a reference whilst also thinking it is perfectly natural to be asking the tenant for one. It won't always be a tight market favouring the landlord.

 

I certainly don't disagree with any particular point, but a landlord only has one chance to get it right. The landlord is also risking far more than the prospective tenant. Tenants complain that it costs too much to move, but this pales in comparison to the hundreds of thousands in damage a really nasty could inflict on their way out. A tenant has to give 30 days notice when vacating but the landlord can't evict them without lengthy procedures, multiple appeals and only on very specific grounds. A tenant can even break a lease and it's difficult for a landlord to enforce.

There are often quotes about the landlord having significantly more power than the tenant. That is true when the tenant asks for something, but the landlord has almost no power to compel the tenant to do anything once they've handed over the keys.

In my experience the tenants that 'know all the rules' are the ones who are likely to create the most problems.

Frankly there are a number of personal and financial profiles that I simply won't lease a property to, even if it means an extended vacancy. I wouldn't say that asking for a landlord reference is an instant decline on my part, but it will put my guard up.

There's also zero chance that I'm going to maintain references from past tenants. The PM will have to handle it.

 

When the provision of an essential societal function such as housing is outsourced to any old Tom, Dick, or Harry it's hardly surprising that rules have to cater for the more vulnerable (typically tenants > landlords).

I find the entire system ridiculous in that providing housing to the public requires less qualification and vetting than it takes to pour a beer at the pub, but here we are.

I don't see what the problem is with a landlord providing a reference, but I don't see it solving any problems either. At the end of the day problematic landlords will use the same fake reference play that tenants do.

A decent solution would be for a lease to nominate a sole 'responsibile person' with that sole person being qualified, vetted, and subject to set penalties for non compliance tenancy regs.
As bad as many PMs are, it would at least cull the worst of the private cowboys out there.

 

Most states require a certificate of registration for an agent (about a day's formal training), true it's less than the RSA course.

When push comes to shove, it's the agency's licensee who is responsible (a minimum of Diploma/Cert IV) to hold a licence.

When there was the push for all states to hold the same minimum qualifications, it was too low a bar for NSW to accept (NSW has the hightest requirements including annual CPD).

Of course you can self-manage -the only qualification is green folding stuff.

 

Yep, let's add in more regulation and paperwork

There should be ways of rating tenants and landlords
Oh wait, there is...... It's tenant references and the entire property condition when inspected by the tenant (almost every tenants teary story about a slumlord has ultra cheap rent for a reason )

The MAJOR issue with most rentals is usually the PM
"IF" there's to be any reform it should be a rating system where the PM need's a reference

*Yes there's some great PM's, but they are few and far between

 

In a few decades from now, most tenants won't need to worry about their landlord's reference, as most properties will be owned and managed by conglomerates like Black Rock.

 

I wish this was true. It's not - and it's bizarre for you to think so, but at least that would make those of us still left in the landlord game more competitive, and I'm pretty sure tenants would be better off with more professional landlords too.

I tend to agree - the typical PM training required for professional registration is comically low. AFAIK, it's includes barely anything on the actual tenancy legislation or laws either.

I generally agree with this. I don't see why you would get offended as a lessor by needing to offer one, but I don't think its a huge problem solver either.

The real reform that is needed (and that will soon come in around the country) will be strict limitations on what lessors/REAs will be allowed to ask for from prospective tenants upon application. Cue landlord outrage I guess.

 

Whilst there's probably some things you can't ask them for, there's a lot that tenants could be asked for.

Think of it like the responsible lending legislation. The banks aren't allowed to lend you money that you can't afford to pay back. To ensure they don't breach this legislation, they ask for or obtain a huge amount of information.

Why should tenant applications be any different? The thinking here is the landlord should not be leasing a property to someone who can't afford it. After all, evicting them for not paying rent is going to put them in a bad situation. It's all about protecting the tenant!

From this you can ask them for ID, payslips, full disclosure of assets & liabilities, living expenses, bank statements and you can conduct credit and employment checks to ensure they're not lying. It's all about being a responsible landlord.

Okay so this is over the top, but when I'm looking at a tenants application, my finance training does kick in and this is how I assess tenants.