Renovating while IP leased (but vacant)

So, I am in an interesting position where my tenant first mentioned they 'may' break lease in the future, then has stopped answering any calls/emails, has moved ALL their stuff out, but is still paid up for rent up to next week (who knows if they will continue beyond that). My place desperately needs renovating before it can be re-let and since the mention of breaking lease I have been gearing up to get in and renovate at the drop of a hat.

The tenant, actually works/lives out of town and and is pretty much only at the property every couple of months (hence the breaking lease). Even when they were living in the property, the tenant is about as relaxed as you can get, and has never been bothered by disturbances (such as me subdividing and building out the back) and in recognition of this I always show a good deal of leniency in putting up with his poor cleaning/maintenance habits.

In light of the above, I have been getting a few minor maintenance/renovation tasks done over the last month or so (before they moved their stuff out), in the knowledge that a) the disturbance would be minor; b) the tenant is very unlikely to actually be at the property; c) even if they were at the property they would be very unlikely to mind. In each instance I have been providing a week's notice, checking they don't mind and offering to reschedule or delay the work if it will in any way inconvenience them. I haven't received a response yet (not entirely unexpected from this tenant).

I had previously been thinking of asking if they minded if I undertook some more major reno work (recarpet, repaint, etc), given they aren't even in the property - possibly offering a reduced rent for that period as thanks.

Now that the tenant has completely moved their stuff out, and it seems pretty obvious they aren't coming back (given their intention to break lease) it seems like even more of a golden opportunity to do some work on the place, and even less likely to inconvenience them, provided I still provide the required notice etc (that is assuming they haven't just done a runner, which is also highly likely). Acknowledging that they are not in rental arrears yet though and still the leaseholder, my question is: is there a limit to the extent of works that can be undertaken whilst a property is rented, assuming the proper notice is provided and the tenant is given every opportunity to object to/reschedule the works (noting that I can't get their actual permission if they won't return contact) and what form does this notice have to take to ensure I meet my obligations under the act?

 

From the sounds of it their gone, nothing left of theirs, place been cleaned etc?
When's the lease officially end?
Assuming its held with bonds admin, any mention re bond release when tenant discussed breaking lease, if not it could be a struggle to get it released without both sigs.

From your explanation of casual attitude/relationship etc, if it were me I'd prob go for it, get the reno done and back on the market, otherwise you maybe waiting for awhile, without rental income, before wishing you'd already started...

However, by the book, Page 32 - Renting out your Property a Lessor’s Guide

 

You will need to do an exit report before you start any renos. After that you can give you tenant notice to enter.

 

Ha! That is wishful thinking! The place is absolutely filthy.

Lease is up in a few months. The other tenant (also still on lease) skipped the country at the end of last year with no notice and is uncontactable, so there is both a precedent there, plus I had already discussed with the remaining tenant the difficulties of getting the bond back without both signatures. I was already gearing up to have to apply to the courts for the bond back. So perhaps if the remaining tenant figures they aren't getting their bond back anyway, and that there weren't major ramifications from the last guy doing a runner (the difference being that when he shot through the rent was still being paid), and breaking lease is going to be a pain in the arse... easiest option is for them to just abandon the place too?

Doesn't look good. BUT then he did pay rent last week (post vacating) so you never know!

 

Exactly my thoughts, but I still want to make sure everything is 'by the book', especially if things do end up in court. Until they are in arrears then I have to asume they are still renting the premises as normal. Which brings me back to the question of whether I can legally enter the property (or have contractors do so) and undertake renovations.

Page 17 of the Lessors Guide (thanks for the link @WestOz) states that "
Under the Act, you have the right to enter the rental premises:
...to carry out or inspect necessary repairs and maintenance at a reasonable time after giving at least three days’ (72 hours’) written notice..." so I'm guessing as long as I give notice the question comes down to what the definition of what "nescessary repairs" are? Repainting a terrible paint job or filthy carpets?

 

Good point on the exit report - however this still assumes they have abandoned the premises, which is more clear cut in terms of my rights of entry, but still not technically the current situation whilst they are paying rent.

 

Hi @theperthurbanist

Unless the tenant is in arrears, it cannot be assumed they have yet done a runner, even though they've moved their stuff out. (Perhaps they like using your house as a holiday house and sleeping on a camping mattress on the floor.

A combination of being in arrears and possessions gone could indeed be deemed to be a possible case of abandonment, and then the correct procedures for that scenario still need to be followed by your PM. You can't just go in and start renovating unfortunately, even if it may seem obvious that the tenant isn't coming back.

 

Agreed, but what if we back up a step and say the tenant is still renting, but is very relaxed, is unlikely to be distrutbed by the works, and is given proper notice and right to refuse. What then are the rules? Is it allowable as long as I don't interfere with their 'quiet enjoyment of the property'?

 

Normally you would need the tenant's permission to enter at an agreed time, rather than sending them a letter advising it is going to happen if you don't hear any objection. I have renovated with tenants in place but always with permission.

 

No, it's not.

Until the lease is formally terminated you have no right to enter without their consent as the work is not urgent.

If the tenants are not paying rent, then follow the correct procedures to have the lease formally terminated.

If the rent is being paid you have no right to enter without permission.
Marg

 

The definition of necessary repairs is simple. Any repair essential to maintain the living conditions - burst pipe, blocked plumbing, electrical faults etc.

Renovations? No. Improvements? No.

If you have already been entering to do minor renovations without permission, you had better hope this does not end up in court.
Marg

 

Duly noted!

The works done so far have been in relation to items raised at the recent property inspection, a few of which still need addressing. Thought that seems pretty clear on undertaking additional work. Guess I'll step up my attempts at making contact and gaining permission... unless the rent goes into arrears before then.

 

If taken further, you would probably find that you have already encroached on their peaceful enjoyment which is why they don't respect you.

 

Just because the rent goes into arrears does not alter anything regarding unauthorised entry. All it does is give you the option to commence eviction proceedings.

Unless or until the lease is terminated you cannot enter the premises for non- urgent repairs without permission. End of story. If you do, and if the case ends up at the rental tribunal, you may be treated quite harshly.

It would appear you don't have a PM. It would be a good idea to read up on your obligations as landlord in your state before you make what may turn out to be an expensive mistake.
Marg

 

I was implying that if the rent went I to arrears I would be issuing the notice under the act with the intention of terminating the contract if no action was taken to pay rent, and that this may likely all happen quicker than me being able to contact the tenant... not that I would just start renovating as soon as they are in arrears. But I take your point!

 

The tenant has a lease. Surely you can't believe it's OK to go in and rip the carpet out? What if he plans to move back in the day after you rip the carpet out?
If you want to go and reno give him the rent back.
I'm actually in a similar situation and have known my tenant has bought a house. It's been 2 months and he hasn't given notice but I'm just waiting.

 

This is an interesting thread in that it highlights for landlords that whilst you are the legal owner of the property, you don't necessarily currently have "possession" of the property. If the tenant is paying rent and hasn't been evicted with the support of the courts, then no, you the landlord do not have "possession" of your own property. Seems weird since you are paying the bills, but that is the process. This highlights the importance of landlord's insurance, and a bit of a slushy fund behind you so you can ride out any storms that come your way. You'll get possession in due course if indeed the tenant stops paying rent. You just need to have enough insurance and slushy funds behind you to ride it out in the meantime. You cannot stand strong without insurance and slushy unless you have significant income streams coming in from elsewhere. Don't stinge on insurance, and don't have $0 in the slushy fund.