Garnishee Question

Hi all,

A question out of curiosity...

A recent former tenant of mine maliciously damaged one of my rentals. Took them to the tribunal and won full costs. The bond didn't cover the damages and the former tenant didn't comply with the tribunal order to pay the full damages by due date.

Now obtained a garnishee notice which will be presented to their bank to obtain the remaining funds.

Does this affect their future ability to obtain financing, rental properties etc? This is in NSW.

Cheers
Al

 

Prob not

 

Al, is this an issue for you or are you just taking a survey?

If the bank coughs up and you get your expenses reimbursed, what is the issue with your ex-tenants credit status?

 

Al, you want to inflict the maximum damage to this person. You got a garnishee, so you got a judgment order. That's got to affect their credit rating somehow.

I once had a writ of execution against someone who banged up my commodore in a fender bender. I thought the punishment of execution was going too far but nonetheless I paid the sheriffs office the prescribed fee and I thought he was going to bump the other fella off.

Little did I know the sheriff was merely going to seize some assets. Heck, the other fella lived in a houso In the Druitt and owned jack squatt. Lesson learned.

 

If you are going to have someone executed don't get the sheriff to do it. I thought that would work in the wild west too.

 

I thought Mt Druitt was the Wild West ?

It's wild and it's west.

 

It's more curiosity regarding the impact of a garnishee. All I want is the court agreed reimbursement of the damages.

 

Are you concerned about unintended negative consequences for the tenant? If so, you're quite the humanitarian.

 

These former tenants are vermin. I won't detail their actions & behaviour here. Hoping karma is legally created.

 

Fair enough, but you mentioned you were concerned about whether it might affect their future ability to obtain financing, rental properties etc.

I would suggest that should they win a Powerball next week, probably not, but if they haven't benefited from a copy of the Barefoot Investor (I have no affiliation with Scott Pape, the author, and his buckets) then maybe they might experience what could be later regarded as a poor financial experience due to decisions that hindsight might judge as "improvement required".

How's that?

 

If they havent got an income or any identifiable assets of value then a court cant enforce it easily. eg Centrelink benefits cant be garnisheed etc Court orders can be of no value