Non paying tenant eviction

Hi all,

I have an IP in Melbourne and that I have been managing myself for the past 10 years without any problem.
I have a new tenant (lease started 6 months ago) Screening during the application went well. No black listed, no bankruptcy, no defaults. For the last 2 months tenant was late and now they don't answer emails or SMS or calls to say they will make an effort to pay.

I called the employer (owner of Carpet Call) and he said he does not recomend the tenant anymore as he left his previous rental property unpaid (tenant was renting from an employer's relative)
6 months ago employer gave me good references and was with him for 3 years.

There are defaults in services as well soon after they occupied the property. Appears that they kept everything clean just to secure a place and then they started to default on everything.

In few days I can send them a notice to vacate (14 days in arrears VIC) and will apply for possession as there are many defaults (previous landlord, current landlord, services) and I don't trust these tenants anymore and I want them out.

The problem is that during these 6 months they had a new baby (2 to 3 months old)
How VCAT will deal with this?
I personally lost my job, I rent where I live and I have to pay the mortgage for the IP. Will the tribunal put tenant needs on top of my needs? I cannot afford paying free accommodation for strangers. I cannot receive Centerlink assistance because I own an IP. But it is taken by these people!!!

In addition, I had an inspection done last week and they brought an unauthorised dog. I was told this dog belongs to the tenant's brother who is moving from Bendigo to Melbourne. So, there is family from both sides of the couple where they can stay.

Any thought or advice?
Thanks.

 

Unfortunately you have to follow the process thats why people use property managers and take out insurance. You might be lucky or unlucky to only lose a couple of weeks rent.

 

Read the info on the vcat website and follow it to the letter.

 

A simple way would be is find a local P-M within your investment property area,and have a talk that you intend to list the property with them in the future or sign the property up with them now,they have a lot more power then stand alone managers who tenants know they can burn it may work..And make sure you have the lease in place because and up to date if the real problems start..good luck..

 

I forgot to mention, it was advertised and screened by REA but manage by myself once the application was accepted. I do have insurance in place, bond issued to RTBA, rent receipts posted, followed the issue to minimize any potential loss and I am recording all events in case I need them.

All legal and following the RTA procedures and waiting the appropriate timeframes.

My concern is that I am the only one doing the legal things and on the other side abusing me and the system.

My question was if VCAT values more a stealing tenant or a fully compliant landlord that is unemployed with no assistance, no family and has the right on his/her private private property?

It is better to engage a landlord lawyer because tenant might know well how to take advantage of the system? Or the tribunal will always be on the tenant side in this case so it will be waste of my time and money?

 

Depends on how well you know about what you're doing I guess. You don't sound very confident.

 

perhaps read up on some cases and see what happens.

 

I am confident in what I am doing, but I am not confident at all about VCAT decisions based on reading other investor's comments about how the landlord/tenant laws are biased in favour of the tenant.

My intention is to hire a landlord lawyer as I am covered by my LL insurance and this is my preference as well.

The tenant already did not follow his own promises and plan payment he made when we discussed this. There is no reason why he will do this now if VCAT will impose this.

My question is, it will be waste of my time and money to hire a lawyer if always VCAT puts tenant first regardless of tenant's wrongdoing behaviour and the landlord situation? Just because the tenant has kids and I will be imposed a plan payment anyway? I have a gut feeling these tenants are using kids as an umbrella to get free accommodation as the law will favour them.

Is this correct or I am wrong? I am not the one to go to provide free accommodation...

 

You make the sound like VCAT does whatever it wants. That's not how it works. VCAT members follow the established law and legal principles.

Generally most complaints I've seen about VCAT decisions stem from people who don't understand the applicable legal principles very well.

Like Terry mentioned, maybe read some cases if you want to understand more.

 

Very common for landlords to think this way - and men in family law proceedings.

 

Thanks Terry. I've never been into a situation like this. Maybe I was very lucky with my previous tenants...

I do not say VCAT will do whatever it wants but it will protect a tenant with kids before the landlord, regardless of the impact on the landlord.
My perception is based on comments made on property forums and not because of my own experience, that's why my question.

Last thing, where it is the best place to access cases so I can have a look?
Many thanks again

 

The decisions can be found on the Austlii site, with a link at Decisions | VCAT

I have won a case in vcat in vic many years ago - run by the agent. So there is hope.

 

Here is a link to the residential tenancies list
AustLII: 601 documents found for ("residential tenancies list")

The first case that I opened had the landlord win:
Howard v Gordon (Residential Tenancies) [2018] VCAT 855 (6 June 2018)

 

VCAT follows the law - I don't always agree with their decisions but I can always understand why they made them. Often they don't take the hard line and evict people if they can avoid homelessness with a payment plan order. If VCAT issues one of these, ask for a condition that if the date is missed you can immediately take the matter back to tribunal with no new NTV, applications etc. etc. this will speed up the process if they don't make any arranged payments if that happens.

VCAT is supposed to look at the situation and see who would be most financially disadvantaged if the situation continued, take proof of your financial hardship being caused by the tenants and I would be very surprised if they ruled in favour of the tenants.

 

In my experience they follow the basic law. But when circumstances are mentioned Eg. Sob stories, inconvenience, they are very pro tenant

So yes they do follow the law, often common sense and courtesy go out the window

 

I took my tenant to VCAT. The tenant was an ex property manager so knew the system inside and out. I provided a 30 page document of evidence, photos, emails and notes. The ex PM lied and tendered false evidence. At the end of the hearing the Tribunal member remarked that he didn't believe we could both be talking about the same property. He could not decide who was lying so split the bond 50/50. It was a bit unusual but you should know that landlords do have wins with VCAT.

 

The "sobs stories, inconvenience" you mention are all relevant to the legal test of whether to order termination and on what conditions.

Its all part of the law and a landlord is welcome to advance their own arguments in favour of a quick termination. The problem is that few do so effectively.

You can hardly blame the law or the tribunal in those cases can you?

For all the complaining I see about this topic from REAs and LLs, I don't think I've seen many threads that have actually asked for information or assistance on how to make an effective argument for termination...

 

I'm not a lawyer. Nor claim to be

But when the tenant is 3 months behind in rent, been to tribunal about every little possible thing over 4 times.
And we are trying to evict them, to get the judgement " you must leave in 3 weeks time, and you can just pay half the rent because of your sob story"
It dont have very much faith in the system

 

I'm not saying that you need to be.

Just that it might be smarter to get some legal advice, or education at least about how to navigate the system instead of constantly bashing your head against it and then complaining about it afterwards.

 

Hang on, that might take some common sense!