Hi Guys, quick question for you. I had a lease broken in QLD last year. We need to now claim the bond for missing rent and re advertisement costs. The PM says they have to attend a QCAT conference call and need their decision before they can access the bond. Is that the correct process as I don't trust my PM? I thought PM should be able to just access it because they have the ledger to prove missing rent and tenant notice to prove they left. Thanks
How come you don't trust your PM? Especially on this sort of basic bond procedure issue - assuming a bond is lodged, it can only be disposed by: 1. Consent of all parties; or 2. Tribunal order.
That doesn't sound right to me. Maybe ask one of the Queensland property managers on this forum? But I've never had to go to QCAT to claim things to come from the bond. I'd be asking the PM (or do it yourself) to lodge the refund of bond form with what you want to claim, list it with appropriate amounts. Lodge the form with just your signature and then the tenant has the option to argue his case. You (or the PM) don't need the tenant's signature. I've only ever had to claim twice, once when a tenant removed the clothes line and drilled a large hole through a VJ wall. I got quotes for nothings, lodged the bond and we both signed. Tenant was happy to pay for the things he'd done wrong. Second time was when my parents lodged a bond form for a tenant who'd done a runner. No signature from the tenant. RTA will write to the tenant's last known address which will be your IP. When they get the form (or never actually get it if they don't look in the letterbox), then RTA gives them three weeks (?) to make a counter claim. If they don't, then you get what you've asked for.
Not sure about Queensland, prob a question for @Andrew Hancock But here in SA, and I assume similar everywhere, there's a couple ways it can go down. If PM does a bond claim and tenant doesn't dispute it (ie vanished) then a letter goes out to the tenant and if not responded to in a certain number days then it goes the PMs way (but they have to provide proof of what the bond funds are going to) Or if both parties mutually agree on an amount, there's a form that can be filled out (either paper or online) and it gets disbursed accordingly. Only if the amount is disputed does it have to go tribunal. Here in SA that's at the landlord's cost regardless of which side is disputing it.
Sounds like SA is similar to Queensland but (unless things have changed) the first to lodge the form doesn't pay if it goes to tribunal. The one defending it does (or used to). Which is why I'm quick to lodge the form if there are any issues.
So PM had the conference call with RTA this morning. She is going for break lease fee + advertising / re letting fee + missing rent off course + cleaning. The tenant refused to pay any of this arguing that they took a long time to rent it again and all. We now have 7 days to lodge paperwork with QCAT which we are going to do soon. The total amount we are going after is $2480 including the missing rent. If we don't lodge within 7 days the bond will be refunded to the tenant. I think we should be able to get the decision in our favour since the tenant broke the lease. Are there still any scenarios where we lose because of the tenant friendly laws of this country? We think tenant is going to claim financial hardship even in that case we should be getting the bond back at least.
Lots of different scenarios where you could 'lose' - hard to say without more information. Not because of "tenant friendly laws" either - personally I think the laws are quite balanced. You're the claimant, and the onus of proof falls upon you. Main legal test will be whether you took reasonable steps to mitigate your loss though - so finding a new tenant. Financial hardship isn't a defence against a break lease claim generally. But your PM should be the one advising you of this...?
Not sure how can we be more clear in presenting our case. It is a break lease situation where tenant has agreed to RTA that they broke the lease. We re let it at $35 p/w less rent which is prove enough that we wanted to rent asap. Even if we get the decision in our favour the most we can do is to put him in the tenant blacklist. That is not going to bring my money back. Now that is tenant friendly in my opinion. If anyone else has experience in this type of situation please share with me so we can position ourselves to recover as much money as possible.
I have no idea what you're presenting to the tribunal - hopefully your PM does though. But there's almost always steps that can be taken to better present a case. For example, having an answer ready for why it was $35/week less rent and not some other amount. You're in the same situation as any other civil judgement creditor that is owed money around the country, tenancy related or otherwise. Actually, you're in a much better position because there is a bond that you can draw down upon, while most judgment creditors don't even have that option. Not to mention landlord insurance options that you may or may not have for the tenancy. Honestly, its best to take a breath and get some perspective. Yeah lots of people here with lots of experience. But I'm sure the first thing that most of them would say is that these are things you should be talking to your PM about at first instance - that's what you're paying them for.
If the tenant was seeking to use the break lease clause, why did the agent not have the tenant sign the bond release at the time? They should have held the release from the lease as a condition of breaking the lease not as an afterthought once they had jumped ship. I note your further answer that it is for the loss in rentable value between the previous tenant and the current market (achieved rent) - which is only claimable up to the end date of the original lease.
Good luck with it, hopefully your PM has their ducks in a row. Let me know if you need any further assistance. - Andrew