Dontrentme.com.au

How does the cost of this compare to the cost tenants pay for access?

 

I can see what you are trying to get at here. And no doubt there are tenants out there who cause problems - so you have the opportunity to take their bond on those matters. And quite successfully so, even in my own experience.

My view is that (not all) but some property managers and some landlords are the cause of a lot of regrettable moments in time. I've even had quite a number of agency directors admit that the property managers are quite often if not always over-burdened with properties (sometimes as much as 200 at a time) as well as inexperienced.

For that reason we take the side of the tenant. As I said, it's not always the case the tenant is correct, and we are happy to review any documentation you provide.

This is a far cry better for any agency and landlord than the treatment, for example, Google provide when you get a negative review. That is going to be online forever. We are trying to be reasonable and have the site be as factual as possible. That's why we welcome objection and comments from the landlord and agency types.

So to answer your question - yes we think its the poor operators who cause a lot of these issues - and yes they'll be paying. The good news is - small time landlords and agencies (e.g. up to five properties) will likely get this service at no cost. Larger operators will have a tiered access. The system includes automated SMS notifications, for example. It will be incredibly helpful.

Exact costs have not yet been determined. We are finishing up the feature-set, then we'll work out the costs that need to be on-charged.

 

So you believe that often the property managers may be at fault. But you're taking it out on the landlord? Why would the property manager care? They aren't heomorraging thousands of dollars a month.

Like the documentation that you make the tenants provide when they submit the quote? Since when have we ever based things on "guilty until proven innocent"?

So as a landlord we pay money to find out when we are the victims of slander? Sounds like extortion to me?

I don't think anyone on this site nesscarily has an issue with the concept - we all know out there that there are dodgy landlords. However I know what I want to see people responsible for their comments.
Either make a requirement for evidence to be submitted with the claim, or make the person responsible for their comment (ie repercussions if it is proven they made it up, or their request was unreasonable). These requirements already exist for the tenant databases.

Likewise, don't allow complaints against landlords for issues with property managers unless their is proof that the landlord is aware of the issue. Contacting a landlord directly to get a resolution isn't harder work than lodging a complaint online (and hoping the landlord sees it) - I know which one is more likely to have a successful outcome.

I do think that there is definately room for further screening of the comments lodged - theres a big difference between:

"House has ceiling leak - landlord notified and nothing was done for 6 months & my couch was ruined"

versus some of the comments posted earlier

"the land lord is disrespectful sexist and can be abusive lies even with photo evidence love to undermine young tenants and the guy doesn't even have an office was very sexist toward my partner worse neighbour hood as well he also has bad communication and accuses the tenant for that"

One is an issue, while the other one just basically says "me and the landlord don't agree on stuff, so I'm going to call him names"?

 

Not really. It's in a million dollar plus part of the suburb and the pic is dated during the tenant's stay.

 

Should change the name to dontsueme

 

The site is ripe for rorting and there isn't a single thing us filthy rich landlords can do about it.

Ask yourself this....

What would nick van hoogstraten do in a situation like this?

 

Thank you for discussing your website @aziebell. The website would be fairer and less litigious if the items nominated by the tenants were claims successfully supported by their states tribunal/legal systems.

 

Yep - attach evidence (tribunal writ, police report, council report, etc) with every lodging

 

I think expecting a police/council/tribunal report, etc is a bit rich considering most gripes will just be the landlord dicking the tenant around, maybe not something that will be taken seriously by authorities or worth the time to go through due process, but might be valuable feedback for someone else considering whether they want to move into the same property and deal with the same hassles.

I think the review screen on the site should prompt for specific examples where the landlord/agency has wronged the tenant, which may improve the quality of the reviews (though those I checked in the 'Latest Reviews' section seemed fine, see below for examples).

For what it's worth if I remember I will leave my landlord a positive review on the site when I vacate my rental

 

So if a tenant posts a bad review that has no merit, that post stays up. Once its discredited, it is removed like it never happened. Doesn't seem to be any incentive NOT to post up dodgy claims.

Wouldn't it be fairer where the person posting up the comment is named and shamed ? At least other sites like tripadviser allow a person to respond and point out facts to help discredit the person who made the false claims.

 

The property investors understand

 

@neK, I agree the ability to respond to reviews would be a fair addition to the site.

 

But then there's no chance to charge $10 per report is there.

If the view is to truly help landlord and tenant, then the cost should split 50/50.

Or have it for free and rely on advertising.

 

Um, how do you "enforce" honest reviews...??

 

And another opportunity to charge the landlord for posting a reply.

It's just a money making attempt by a site that has no credibility.

Read one review unit was OK but OO in block don't like tenants. Maybe because the tenant didn't want to follow strata rules re garbage parking etc etc. Another comment about a block of units being full of 'Indians'. Very racist. Guess it could be a positive if it's another India looking for a unit lol.

Absolute waste of time.

Maybe time will come to employ a Russian DOS attack specialist to examine the site lol

 

I like it. I think it evens out the playing field.

It's not like TICA requires proof of wrongdoing before a landlord or agent lists someone on it, which arguably has a greater impact than a rental listed on an obscure review website.

 

Lets hope the feedback is getting back to @aziebell

 

Site is hosted in 07, Australia and links to network IP address 103.13.103.226

Seems that anybody can put up any comment on any property so help yourself and add credibility to the valued comments already contributed hint hint

 

Domain Name dontrentme.com.au
Last Modified 14-May-2014 02:19:36 UTC
Status ok
Registrar Name Public Domain Registry Pty Ltd
Registrant ZEEBS GROUP PTY. LTD.
Eligibility Type Company
Eligibility ID ACN 152322837
Registrant Contact ID DI_29662324
Registrant Contact Name Anthony Ziebell
Registrant Contact Email [email protected]
Tech Contact ID DI_29662324
Tech Contact Name Anthony Ziebell
Tech Contact Email [email protected]
Name Server dns1.servercontrol.com.au
Name Server IP 202.130.32.11
Name Server IP 2400:d400:9898:1000:0:0:0:1001
Name Server dns2.servercontrol.com.au
Name Server IP 178.79.139.191
Name Server IP 2a01:7e00:0:0:f03c:91ff:fedf:629c
Name Server dns3.servercontrol.com.au
Name Server IP 202.130.32.11
Name Server IP 2400:d400:9898:1000:0:0:0:1001
DNSSEC unsigned

 

lol at the pro hackers going to work

Watchout @aziebell these guys know how to use ping and whois. You might be in big trouble.