SA PM's seek Parliament advice on issues

This article comes from a PM magazine I'm subscribed to:

A group of property managers is seeking an audience with members of Parliament to address its concerns which include delayed bond refunds, slow progression to tribunal in cases of arrears, and other “injustices” that allegedly place “undue stress” on PMs, tenants and landlords.


In a letter sent to all members of South Australia’s Parliament, the Attorney-General’s department and “other relevant stakeholders” and forwarded to Residential Property Manager, the South Australian Property Management Community (SAPMC) said it is seeking to “effect change for the benefit of thousands of investors impacted by the massive delays and inconsistencies that CBS [Consumer and Business Services] and SACAT [South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal] has been unable to rectify over the past 12 months”.

“Some issues have even progresses to an even more critical state that is having a marked impact on the financial and mental stress of property investors (taxpayers) and property managers,” the letter said.

SAPMC is seeking a meeting with members of Parliament to discuss the issues affecting PMs in South Australia. According to the letter, these include:

• Extended delays (four-plus weeks) for agents/landlords seeking a hearing at SACAT: “Often tenants are nearly six to eight weeks in arrears before a hearing is even set. This puts undue stress on all parties,” the letter said.
• Phone support (Tenancies Advice): SAPMC claims phone support is “regularly not responsive due to lack of staffing”, with hold times of up to an hour. “Often agents are met with a message stating ‘call back later’,” the letter said.
• Extended delays in receiving bond refunds: “Funds owed in arrears to a landlord puts excessive financial strain on property owners.”
• “The injustice of the ‘applicant’ (often already out-of-pocket) not being able to recoup the application costs when the opposing party is at fault. This restriction goes against the fair and equitable principle for which SACAT was designed.”
• “Clunky/outdated and troublesome bonds online system that is vague, difficult to navigate and problematic at the best of times. Tenants have great difficulty in accessing and navigating the system they are not familiar with.”
• Thirty-one-day response period when claiming the bond: The SAPMC says tenants previously had 10 days to respond before a bond was escalated (in line with the legislation) “and yet with communication these days being more succinct, property owners are now sometimes waiting months for their funds”.
• The landlord/agent being liable to pay the application fee to receive a bond back if either party disputes “even when the tenant leaves a debt, the property owner is forced to pay even more money to receive the arrears/debt that have been left unpaid”.
• “Bonds being paid/refunded to the property owner, and then being disputed by the tenant up to two years later”.
• “Bonds, SACAT and Housing SA not communicating efficiently, documents being lost/ not received and therefore causing major delays.” SAPMC also noted “just one individual CBS staff member is responsible for processing every single bond refund request for the entire state.”

The group said “without any representation of a practicing property manager on their board”, the Real Estate Institute of South Australia no longer speaks for them and they are now seeking parliamentary assistance.

“We are now calling upon an external voice and assistance in helping us get the answers [as] we need to move forward with the actions that are long overdue, yet continue to effect property investors every single day.

“The current systems and processes are costing the state’s taxpayers and real estate businesses unknown millions of dollars [in] lost income, and change is what we need, and now.”

The letter was sent by Brett Wheatland, property management department manager at LJ Hooker, Glenelg, suburban Adelaide.

In a follow-up email to stakeholders and Residential Property Manager, Mr Wheatland wrote that “the plan is to go viral if a response is not given!!!”.

SAPMC claims to represent 550-plus real estate professionals including property managers, principals and business owners.

 

So how do we get it going viral?

Are you going to join the team as the PM rep??

 

What are your thoughts DT? I'm having a read of the complaints and I reckon its around 60% pointless whining, and 40% valid grievances.

 

In progress.

I agree with you but would have a higher percentage than you stated:

- Bonds take way longer than they should, part of which is from double handling between CBS and Housing. If a tenant uses Housing Assistance for their bond, both them and CBS need to check it and neither knows what the other is doing.

- The fact that bonds can be disputed months or years after a decision has been rightfully made through the appropriate channels, needs to stop.

- Taking far too long to get SACAT cases at the moment. Eg I have one that stopped paying on 6th of October, sent the appropriate notice 2 weeks after that which allows 7 days to pay or quit. Logged tribunal application last Friday, got receipt on Monday, got email today saying that there's a slot on 29th November. That'll be nearly 2 months the owner has been without money, over and above what the bond is. And assuming the Tribunal hearing goes my way.

- Regardless of whether tenant or PM/LL disputes a bond return amount/split, it has to go to tribunal at the LL's expense. Even if it was a nonsense dispute or tenant doesn't even show up.

- Online bond interface is really really poor, and is down often.

 

2 months

Can the bond be increased? And weekly rent dropped a smidge for back up?

 

Well, 32 days as of today. Another 20 til SACAT will hear me. Then they usually give 7-14 days vacate notice as a best case scenario.

Nope, max of 6 weeks for properties over 250+ in SA.

Not sure what you mean by this?

 

If tenants are scared off by a larger bond drop the weekly tent by 5-10pw to get them in

 

Obviously review market conditions in terms of rent levels to attract tenants in, I don't think the bond amount is much of a factor in that.

Though I have noticed a bit of a pattern -> the ones with above market rentals are more likely to have problems. My theory is that good quality tenants can find a home anywhere they like, and its the lesser quality ones that are desperate enough to apply for expensive properties.

I've had far fewer lease breaks than any of my colleagues i've talked to. Some were even saying it was an epidemic. Keep everyone happy. Don't be overly expensive. Everyone wins.