QLD? Rental Reforms - Have Your Say in QLD Premier Proposed Reform

OK ... where do we go from here?

 

Are they particularly bad or something? I haven't been following.

EDIT: A quick lookup and scan later, it looks like nothing particularly controversial except the issue of not being able to end a tenancy for no grounds?

 

REIQ: No winners under QLD rental reforms | Savings.com.au

 

tenants being able to make mods to your property without your consent is a little unnerving.

 

The public have been given six weeks to respond to the Palaszczuk Government’s proposal, should you wish to express your opinions please do so via the following link:

Give feedback | Renting in Queensland | Your Say Housing and Public Works.

One week had already lapsed, so less than 5 weeks left

 

Seems like pretty alarmist hyperbole from REIQ to me. And did they just make up the fact that rents would somehow increase?

I mean it looks like they're proposing some minimum rental standards, and a (rebuttable) presumption of allowing pets and minor alterations by a tenant - these things are arguably the legal position currently anyway, and being rolled out in other states.

Even the lack of no grounds termination is probably something that will be a near-future trend in Australia it looks like.

 

That is a bit of a concern only insofar that there appears to be little information on who monitors the scale of modification or the quality of the work performed. It needs clarified, otherwise the devil will be in the detail once the proposed legislation starts its journey. At face value REIQ is scaremongering.

When taxpayers money is being used to fund private housing then the taxpayer has a right to demand minimal standards of habitation. It can't be a blank cheque so I'd go further and introduce mandatory annual gas and water quality checks and electrical checks. The sky won't fall in.

Not sure how they calculate the 5% increase but I'm sure landlords would be doing this already if they could.

 

https://www.propertyology.com.au/queensland-rent-reforms-may-cost-tenants-5000-per-year/

 

Thanks for the link. I've submitted my response. I'm generally not in favour of laws that have potential to stifle investment. The average landlord/mum and dad investor has greater incentive to look after their most expensive assets than large scale developers.

 

I'm up to page 40 of a 171 page document. So far nothing I have read bothers me.
Disclaimer: Our properties are in excellent condition and we allow pets. The kitchens and bathrooms may not be trendy, but each property is already water and energy efficient with deadbolts on every window and door. If the rents increase another $100 a week each next year, then nice one. Having just read Propertyology's article, it is heavily biased to insensitise readers to purchase new investment properties.

 

Looks like this article turns up the wild claims and hyperbole up to 11. "An extra $100/week or more"?

I wish.

And then author straight off the bat misrepresents some of the fundamental concepts of tenancy law. Landlords don't get to choose the who, what and how of the asset - that's part of what you exchange away temporarily in return for rent.

Then cue a bunch of charts that pretty much nothing to do with any rental law reform.

 

I'm not sure what you mean by this in regards to the rental law reform proposals?

 

Complete the survey if you must ...

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/queenslandrentalreforms

 

letting tenants do minor mods that can be reversed without asking is unnerving. Nekminit come back to a blue painted house that we have to pay for.

Rental Reforms - Email the Premier about the proposed rental reforms

 

The recommended proposal included the tenants having to rectify any unwanted changes at the end of the tenancy though.

 

What is a pet resume ? This paper was obviously written by public servants.

 

And, how much experience have you had wherein the property was returned in order of when it was rented out? (Provided fair wear and tear ... )

One of our IPs in Sydney, wardrobe rod must have been broken, replaced by an ill-fitting rod. One of the little things, which at the end of the day, adds up. The PM did not notice
On a more expensive note, there was a big sharp indent on the window - which was obviously caused from the inside .. this was not noticed either. Suffice to say - I had to fight for it to be out of the tenants bond and strata. This is only because the IP is local and I was able to check it out. Suffice to say, we changed our PM after this incident.

 

So while that sucks (and I would probably add that your experience is a fairly common one), I don't see what it has to do with the proposed law reforms?

The stuff you mentioned is already a breach of the lease agreement, and it looks like you were able to go through the usual tribunal process and get compensation for your damages.

What's it have to do with the main 4 areas of residential tenancy law they're making changes to?

 

You said, "The recommended proposal included the tenants having to rectify any unwanted changes at the end of the tenancy though."

And how do you propose to manage that? And what defines "rectified" ?