When a lease is coming to an end - what is the full plan?

What happens if the property is being sold? EG, lease is not being renewed, owner is selling, say the lease doesn't expire until early July. Owner wants to have maintenance done and property staged.

Can the tenant say "No access till our lease is up"? Or 28 days before lease ends? Curious, thinking of selling.

 

How is that so? Why draw up a lease agreement then? Why the need to issue a notice to vacate

 

Not a fan at all of the "hold a gun to the tenants head" approach. Sending a termination notice + renewal lease and telling the tenant to choose, when they do have the right under the act to remain on a perodic, is a draconian method in my mind.

A good tenant will stay regardless of a periodic lease, and a tenant that wants to move will move regardless of a fixed term lease. Bulk of my tenants are on periodic, rent comes in, get adjusted as needed, houses get maintained, two way street.

 

If they have been served a termination notice 60 days before end of lease, how do they have the right to remain on periodic?

 

They don't. Unless they go to tribunal and argue that the termination is retaliatory in nature for not signing a fixed term lease.

 

I do not see it as two way, I think it is strongly in favor of the renter, the 90 days in NSW is a joke IMO

If tenants want stability, guess what, that is what LL want, plus all the insurance reasons, I have found if they wont sign it is often because they already have sights set to go elsewhere, but it is not always the case.

Lease is better IMO, neither is a fail proof though in regard to leaving or having other issues.

 

What is 90 days in NSW?
Termination notice or rental increases or something else?

 

Termination with no reason specified

 

I asked this question a few posts but didn't really get a response besides the one thatbum made about they not being in breach (which i also don't understand why if a lease is in place). Anyone know the answer to my initial question?

 

I thought I had answered by giving the example I recently had. There's no consequences at all.

Tribunal will set a new exit date (eg 7-21 days from the tribunal date) and a bailiff will physically remove them if needed. They're still expected to pay rent for that period.

The only consequence I guess is that they wouldn't get a very good reference.

 

Hi dt, sorry as your post was before my question, I was thinking maybe there was something I'm missing as it didn't seem logical there are no consequences at all. Surely they should be fined at the very least.

If you put this in the context of you borrowing money from the bank and missed your payment even as a result of hardship or any other reason, you will incur a fee for late payment on top of interest you have to pay. How is this different to a tennant overstaying their due date? If you argue that the government is protecting the tennants so they actually have a place to stay, then why are they not protecting the consumer from the bank.

I just dont quite comprehend how easy it is to get out of an overstay even though a lease agreement is in place.

 

On the PM forums I'm a member of, someone gave a better example. The investor's lease finished where they were renting, so they wanted to move back into their own property. Tenant didn't move out and so owner had to stay in a caravan park for 6 weeks during the tribunal process at their own cost.

There was a thread on here recently from a tenant who wanted to know his rights regarding him not having time to find another place. This made me mad and I think my post in his thread got deleted. Hardship is one thing, cant be bothered is another.

 

Hi I recently bought a unit in NSW and inherited the old lease. The lease is due to expire in 2 weeks. The PM, who also managed for the seller, told me that the tenant wants to stay, but the tenant can only sign the new lease after the current lease is ended. I think he is wrong.

My reading of the current lease agreement is that - if the tenant does not sign the new lease before the current lease expires, the lease will automatically become a periodic lease. While it will be no issue if the tenant still sign a new lease, but if the tenant does not sigh, on a periodic lease, i will need give 90 days notice for tenant to vacant ( tenant only needs to give 21 days notice).

I like the certainty of having a term lease, so can avoid the situation that the Property could be vacant for up to 3 months during Dec Jan and Feb period. My understanding is that ideally the new lease should be signed at least 30 days before the current lease end date, in order to meet the 30 day requirement if requiring the tenant to vacant. It's too late for me now. So hopefully the tenant will sign the new lease without any drama.

Am I correct? Would appreciate some advice. The property is in NSW. Thanks.

 

Will leave the rest up to someone else qualified to answer, but I am curious how long before a fixed term lease end date is required for termination notice to be sent out in NSW to terminate the tenancy at end of fixed term lease.

PM's from other states on this forum mentioned 60 days, but @dabbler and @DaveM mentioned above that in NSW it is 90 days - but I wonder if that was to terminate a periodic lease and if so, how long is required to terminate a fixed term lease in NSW?

 

There's a tip written on this here Tenancy Tip Thursday - Notice to end a lease

 

+1 .. though respect others perspectives but the law is deliberately structured not to be strictly rigid in enforcement and let draconian landlords get their way. I find it disengenious to sign lease specifically granting periodic after fixed then terminating specifically to remove this right. Not the intent of the lease. Ask sure, that is a win win.

So if you go down the draconian path, then things may not always go your way. Personally if I was on the receiving end of this, I would focus on myself and if that resulted in difficulty for the landlord/agent it would not be my concern.

In my renting time I never saw this either but I suspect some agents have engaged consultants with revenue maximisation "strategies'. My managing agents do not have such a simple black and white view on this either.

That being said, should work most of the time.... But not without risk.

 

If lease expires in 2 weeks, then you need 90 days notice, but tenant can re sign, that is not a problem.

Re draconian laws, well NS W is heavily weighted to renters..... 90 days for LL but 21 for the tenant......real advantage to LL clearly......

It used to be 60.....but I think 45 would be ample, 30 days is even more than fair IMO, lets face it, this is what owners have to do, alas we do not make the rules, they are forced upon us.

 

Just another question on a tennancy ending. Is there a set time the tennant must return the keys to the agent on the final day of tennancy?

What happens if it falls on a public holiday like today or a weekend?

 

No set time as far as I know in most states. The return of the keys usually isn't that big a deal - just part of the vacant possession process.

Presumably on a public holiday the tenant would be in a position to offer up the keys but your PM not in a position to take them until the next business day.

 

This is spot on and exactly what we do. You cannot force someone to sign a new lease but the agent must take control. This process is completely legal and depending on your agent, standard practice.

If the tenant hasn't signed the lease at -30 days to expiry we withdraw the lease offer and commence advertising and the Notice to Leave remains in force. Of course, this is all in consultation with the owner but most people are very keen to avoid vacancy and therefore prefer not to enter periodic.