VIC Tenants having surveillance equipment

Discussion in 'Property Management' started by Ronen, 18th Apr, 2021.

Join Australia's most dynamic and respected property investment community
Tags:
  1. Ronen

    Ronen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    24th Mar, 2021
    Posts:
    1,044
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Those two are completely different.
    In one, there's a constant, ongoing invasion of one party to the other party, where one has no legal right over the seconds premise.

    The second is an instant of a lawful person taking pictures of fixtures and fitting, while trying to avoid including personal belonging which identify the renter or invade their privacy (a common cheap bowl on a table or a queen bed are personal belonging but does not constitute identifiable, a vibrator laying inside a closed drawer - is) is another.

    It's the same as saying that someone walking in street and taking random pictures which may or may not capture your house window, to someone who's setting up a camera on a tripod directed at the general direction of your house windows in a way that makes it likely they capture it.
    Do you think the law treat those two in the same way?
     
  2. Ronen

    Ronen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    24th Mar, 2021
    Posts:
    1,044
    Location:
    Melbourne
    That's an option.
    I do not know if there's one though. How can I breach if I've not inspect and witnessed it?

    And no - it's not illegal in that way.
    I probably should use "non compliant" rather then "illegal" as I'm aware "illegal" tends to be interpret as criminal.
    It's not criminal, it's only against a law (aka - illegal).
     
  3. Ronen

    Ronen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    24th Mar, 2021
    Posts:
    1,044
    Location:
    Melbourne
    I mean - the breaches I know of are not criminal.
    Is there any criminal activity going on? I doubt it, but I have no idea atm.
     
  4. Scott No Mates

    Scott No Mates Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    27,095
    Location:
    Sydney or NSW or Australia
    So the camera(s) on 7 acres can provide medium/high resolution pictures of the adjoining 30 Acres? Maybe a couple of hundred metres into a site if the camera was on the boundary but could not provide coverage over the majority of the adjoining site.

    So it's unapproved works (council) or condoned by yourself/previous owner as they haven't been told to remove the works?
     
  5. Ronen

    Ronen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    24th Mar, 2021
    Posts:
    1,044
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Yep.
    I don't see where the act (none of them) refer to "percentage" of violation.
    If the cameras covers enough ground to positively recognise person and his movements (not just the tip of his shoes) - it doesn't matter if it's only when they use 10m of the land and not when it's the rest 100,000m....

    Yeah, along those lines.
    However, not myself or previous owner. All by the current tenant.
    A good analogy will be they erect a free standing building of more then 10sqm (just so it'll be clear that such building requires permit) without my consent and without appropriate permit (double fault :) )
     
  6. thatbum

    thatbum Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    5,788
    Location:
    Perth, WA
    No I don't. But you don't seem to realise your breach is much worse while the other is barely a breach, if at all.

    Good luck to you at VCAT. I suspect you're in for a hard time. I don't recommend you DIY your own property management or lawyering in the future.
     
    Ryan23, Marg4000, luckyone and 2 others like this.
  7. Ronen

    Ronen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    24th Mar, 2021
    Posts:
    1,044
    Location:
    Melbourne
    If you refer again to pictures taken while inspecting - then you're wrong.
    I'm reading VCAT decisions and VCAT has no issue with pictures taken while inspecting, given there has been an effort to not include personal effects.

    However, that's not my line at all.
    The whole inside cams - I got it. They can. I'll deal with it.
    The breaches they have are much more profound and VCAT could do flips and still will have to rule them justified. They cannot be interpret in any way other then breach of duty or refute as it's not the tenants doing. I have hard conclusive evidence.

    BTW, I'm not seeking eviction. The tenants will leave at the end of the agreement (they indicated they will and even if not, I have a valid result with all the supporting documents needed for vacant notice at the end of the tenancy).

    The only thing I wanted out of all this is to have a proper documentation of the state of the property and properly breach them now, so whatever needs fixing will be fixed now and I'm not left with mess when they leave, trying to recap the money (bond my be sufficient, unless they start not paying rent as well)

    Their everyday tenancy does not create me any grief nor create a prolong damage and they (to date) pay on time-ish.
     
  8. Ronen

    Ronen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    24th Mar, 2021
    Posts:
    1,044
    Location:
    Melbourne
    I'd say that again, I had 3 PMs in the past.
    Two were so soft that even when the tenants stop paying (COVID ****), they didn't do anything. Like the world ended and I have to just sit and wait for it to over. Which was not the right way to deal with it.
    Yeah, it was complicated back then, but that's why the get their whatever % for management - to deal with the complex stuff, but just the rent statements.

    Then I moved to a shark PM, from the agency I was selling the house with.
    Still COVID, I needed to sale (as I bought this things and had a settlement date) and needed to find some leverage to move the tenant out.

    The shark into a full force attack, making the tenant to digging his heels in the sand, until I jumped into the email exchange and pushed the PM away, smoothing the tenant over, resulting in him moving within a month and me losing only 1 month rent.
    The idiot PM responded with "thank you". What a knuckle head.

    Just to make me even more happy about the 1000's of dollars I wasted on those useless PMs, when I took possession, I went into the house and felt I'm in the RSPCA. The smell of dogs was so overwhelming. The holes in the back yard too.
    Did my PM mentioned anything about pets without consent when she did her multiply inspections? Nah.
    When I opened the oven, which was brand new $1,000 Westinghouse when they started the tenancy, it looks like they used it by putting the food bare on the heating elements and never in the 4 years they were there cleaned it.
    Took me 2 hours of taking it apart and scrub it to remove most of it.

    Anything on the inspection report? Nah.
    Second..... YUK!!!! Who lives like this?????

    Oh yeah, she did mention there's a crack in the shower screen. New screen went a week after. Thank you landlord ;)

    Lucky for me, it was already new when I renoed for sale....
    And no... It's not a commotion housing, nor cheap rent. Normal place. Normal renters.
    Looks better now, after the reno, but the bones were there: https://www.realestate.com.au/property/19-coowarra-way-berwick-vic-3806


    So thanx, but no thanx.
    I'll manage my own property from now on. I can read and I can form a cause.
    I have solicitor btw. He's involved.
     
  9. Piston_Broke

    Piston_Broke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    30th Jul, 2015
    Posts:
    4,081
    Location:
    Margaritaville
    You need to have a video or at least audio recorder during the next visit.
    Yes you can.
    Welcome to 2021.

    Actually there is no right to privacy in Australia.
    The US has it in their constitution, but in reality are more tracked and survelied than here.
    Snowden blew the lid on it, so they just changed the laws.

    Don't waiste your time on the outside cameras, work on the easy scores that will get them out asap.
     
  10. Ronen

    Ronen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    24th Mar, 2021
    Posts:
    1,044
    Location:
    Melbourne
    I wonder, how many PMs and LL here are going into inspections wearing a recording device for their own protection?

    I mean, many PM are women, who may be faced the common baboon for a tenant or even just the occasional nutter.
    I'd guess it'd make anyone feel uncomfortable.
     
  11. Piston_Broke

    Piston_Broke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    30th Jul, 2015
    Posts:
    4,081
    Location:
    Margaritaville
    It doesn't matter. They should. any smart one would carry a small audio recorder in their pocket.
    You have stated this about 20 times. It's tough titties for you if it does, cause that's just how it is.
    Why are you even trying to project your issues on "anyone" and "everyone".
    I wish we had a right to privacy in our constitution. We don't. And so we get over it and get on with it.
    You have more important things to deal with going by the OP.
    You got a great deal, this is just part of the cost. Maybe a reason why the previous owners sold.

    PS there are different laws for recording and sharing such recordings. Just because they can record it lgeally, does not mean they can share it.
     
  12. Ryan23

    Ryan23 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    16th May, 2016
    Posts:
    224
    Location:
    Queensland
    I can see why tenants have cameras inside for inspections. Especially if they are not home. Some random they don’t know going into their home and through their stuff...
     
    jared7825 likes this.
  13. Ronen

    Ronen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    24th Mar, 2021
    Posts:
    1,044
    Location:
    Melbourne
    If you wanna take the ****, at least read :)
    I meant it'll be very uncomfortable for a lady PM to be faced a big male while she's trying to conduct an inspection.
    Don't think I state that more than this one time....

    This crossed my mind, but the pervious owners were even rougher, so I don't think so.
    They did know and couldn't care less about tenancy act. The tenants could breach them multiply times, but didn't. I think they either were afraid or really wanna stay out of the VCATs radar.
     
  14. Momentum

    Momentum Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    19th Aug, 2015
    Posts:
    1,123
    Location:
    Collins St, Melbourne
    So what happened in the end
     
  15. Ronen

    Ronen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    24th Mar, 2021
    Posts:
    1,044
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Promise to update when it ends.
    Also, I promise to share the breaches as soon as I serve them.
     
  16. Ronen

    Ronen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    24th Mar, 2021
    Posts:
    1,044
    Location:
    Melbourne
    An update here, for those who are interested, and for future reference.

    As mentioned, the tenants tried to flex their muscles, they even lawyered up.
    The first email came with very similar demands to the one the tenants made, most are so far fetched that I thought it's quite embarrassing he'd bring it up.
    My second thought was that the lawyer himself is happy to take their money. Not my problem. Don't care.

    My respond to the email was very clear "Go F yourself" with many references to the "F yourself Act".
    The second email from him was a show of an Olympic level of back paddling. Too funny.
    It end with them understanding they can't do anything to stop me inspect nor take photos.
    They did ask for me to find a RE agent to mitigate the inspection, they will pay for it. I agreed. Don't care.

    Today we had the inspection, the REA is very experienced, she actually met them in the past (before my time, but in the same property) and she was doing a "mediation" type of meeting ("tell me your side, tell me your side") and we end up with me being of high regards to myself (I should look it up, I'm not sure what it means, but I think it means I'm awful full of myself bloke. Fair enough) but she told the tenants that the "relationship" is over and they should start looking for other place to live, cause the clock in ticking.

    I was wearing a covert pen, recording the meeting, cause I didn't know which way it'll go.

    The inspection itself was good. The property is well maintained. No worries there.

    For those who were interested in the breaches, they are:
    • Back yard was driven with motorbikes. It left the backyard with ugly ruts.
      This was fixed before today. They stopped and the grass takes over.
      All good.
    • There was a huge graffiti on one of the properties wooden fences.
      Was removed and painted today. They knew it's very wrong.
    • They installed a coonara inside the shed and punch a hole in the shed metal ceiling.
      Never asked for consent. Was told they have to fix it and provide a proof it was fixed by licensed tradesman.
      They tried to go "but it was before, after, in the middle" ****, but the REA told them they actually have to.
    • They have huge above the ground pool inside the shed, huge SPA and outside pool in the garden.
      None is licensed per the building act from 2019.
      They didn't know what I'm on about, but the REA told them it's actually massive breach.
      They will fix it now. In whatever way. I don't care.

    The end result for them is dire.
    They planned to stay there for long time (we talked about 10's of years), but they thought it's a good idea to fight the owner in a the mud. They forgot that many time owners has much longer breath and going into the mud makes everybody dirty.
    They know they will be either leaving or pushed out at the end of the tenancy, few months away.

    I visit some parts of the property I've never seen (was not allowed on sales inspection) and was amazed to see how good this property is. Much better then I thought. I see why they wanna stay...

    I think the penny just dropped, with them figuring out that what have now will not be replicated.
    There are just no properties in the area for rent that offers the same facilities, not even twice the rent.
     
  17. Ronen

    Ronen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    24th Mar, 2021
    Posts:
    1,044
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Tenants are funny sometimes....

    Just to make this whole story even more amusing, the tenants sent me an email stating that few items are their and will be taken when they leave.
    Those items:
    • Huge metal palate rack.
    • A long wire fence along the house.
    • An electric front gate.
    I asked to why they reckon it's theirs and they said: "the previous owners gifted it to me before the sale (to you)".
    I felt I do need to ask a simple question before I give her half of the house, if she has any type of proof for that. She doesn't.
    Not to mention that in the contract of sale if clearly states that all fixtures at the inspection are included in the sale.
    Or the fact that neither the original contract they had with the previous owner, nor the new one they have with me has any part that state that those fixtures belongs to them.
    I guess I have to take your word for it? Do you want me to through in the dishwasher, front bedroom and the living room? Are you sure those were not gifted to you before sale?

    I suggest that she get a stationary declaration from the previous owner stating he "gifted" her all those stuff and with that she can go to VCAT and ask him for compensation.

    I'd be very interested to see the previous owner sign on paper that will open him to legal actions from either the tenants side or mine.
    Can't wait. I'll throw the popcorn into the microwave.
     
  18. Redwing

    Redwing Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    7,431
    Location:
    WA
    Woolworths announces trial of police-style bodycams for staff

    Woolworths has announced a new hi-tech move in a number of its stores, introducing police-style bodycams in a new trial to help reduce the level of abuse aimed at employees.

    Reports of abuse inside Woolworths stores have doubled following the coronavirus outbreak, which saw a number of brawls over toilet paper and other scarce supplies break out between customers.

    A study from the Shop Distributive and Allied Employees Association revealed 85 per cent of Woolworths staff have been the target of verbal, physical or sexual assault while at work.

    The cameras will be only worn by senior supervisors, who will have the ability to turn the cameras on and off should they see an incident developing. Woolworths hopes the cameras will assist police in investigations following incidents in stores, and act as an extra deterrent for potential troublemakers.

    The three-month trial is being implemented in 11 stores across NSW, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia and Western Australia.

    upload_2021-4-30_17-31-52.png
     
  19. thatbum

    thatbum Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    5,788
    Location:
    Perth, WA
    Your whole story sounds so much like a self-congratulating pat-on-the-back that I wonder what actually happened - impossible to tell.
     
  20. bmc

    bmc Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Oct, 2015
    Posts:
    1,112
    Location:
    Sydney
    What has happened in this country that we now need this. FFS
    sad day australia

    anyway back to the program

    4 pages and rolling.
     
    inertia and Michael Mitchell like this.