Join Australia's most dynamic and respected property investment community

Would expect the landlord to pay?

Discussion in 'Property Management' started by Chilliblue, 24th Jul, 2015.

  1. Chilliblue

    Chilliblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    1,579
    Location:
    Australia
    We have a property that has had the front entrance door lever damaged with the tenant stating that someone must have tried to break in.

    However, we installed a security screen door at the request of the tenant only 6 months ago at our cost and at her request which she has now informed the agency she never bothers to use.

    To top it off, she has stated that the lever needs to a be knob.

    My thoughts are that we replace the lever at our cost.

    Opinions welcome.
     
  2. Pistonbroke

    Pistonbroke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    395
    Location:
    Guangzhou
    It doesn't work why?

    A knob is an unsatisfactory opener - arthritics etc can't grasp it. A single action lever handle is preferable.
     
    Perp likes this.
  3. Lu Bracher

    Lu Bracher Active Member

    Joined:
    19th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    44
    Location:
    Brisbane
    1. If the door is damaged due to intruder, we tell tenants we need a QP# otherwise it is deemed they or persons they allowed on the property have done this.
    2. Security screen door knob request change to handle - as a pm I would tell her to do it herself and provide our office with a receipt from someone suitable. Fact that she doesn't use it, annoying but I wouldn't go changing something just because it doesn't suit them.
     
  4. Samten

    Samten Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    25th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    275
    Location:
    Sydney
    QP# ? is that a Queensland Police report number?
     
  5. Lu Bracher

    Lu Bracher Active Member

    Joined:
    19th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    44
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Police report number - this is the only exception to let them off
     
  6. thatbum

    thatbum Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    902
    Location:
    Perth, WA
    Interesting agency policy, but not really reflective of the legal position. Did that policy ever get challenged?
     
  7. Lu Bracher

    Lu Bracher Active Member

    Joined:
    19th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    44
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Nope, the reality is - the property has been handed over to them in a condition. The return of that property legally has to be less 'reasonable wear and tear'
    If there is any damage, they are responsible. If they don't believe they are the cause, they need to notify Police and advise our office of report number.
    I'm could just be a grumpy old woman these days but I generally don't believe them unless they have proof.

    No one has challenged this, they are probably too scared to with me. However, I would be putting up a good argument before the adjudicator if there is damage to the property - I do all our court hearings and I'm not shy to express my opinions. If I'm wrong I'm wrong they'll tell me and I'll learn from it.
     
  8. Scott No Mates

    Scott No Mates Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    5,567
    Location:
    Sydney or NSW or Australia
    The PM is not there to be like (all the time).
     
    Esh likes this.
  9. Chilliblue

    Chilliblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    1,579
    Location:
    Australia
    An update. The tenant has paid for the replacement handle as she did not want to make a police report. Thanks for the replies.
     
  10. thatbum

    thatbum Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    902
    Location:
    Perth, WA
    Firstly, the legal test is not what you describe. Forget about 'reasonable wear and tear' - that term gets thrown around way too much without hardly anyone knowing what it actually means.

    A tenant is only liable for any damage they intentionally or negligently cause. The onus of proof is on the claimant - the landlord. This means the tenant has to have done something wrong, which led to the damage, and the landlord or agent has to prove it to the civil standard.

    And the whole attitude of 'having a crack' at court/tribunal - well this is a personal bugbear of mine. Fair enough if its just your own matter, but if we're talking about a professional who is representing clients, then I don't think just having a crack without proper reference to the law is good enough to take a matter to hearing.

    When I was a duty lawyer at the courts, it was heaps of this kind of stuff that clogged up the court lists, wasted everyone's time, and left the loser (landlord and property managers usually) pretty bitter about wasting their time and money. Of course, they thought it was the fact that the courts were biased against landlords - and hence the myth continues.
     
  11. wylie

    wylie Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    2,944
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Sounds awfully like she made up the "someone tried to break in" story to get out of paying. If she did think someone tried to break in, she would have been happy to file a police report.
     
  12. Chilliblue

    Chilliblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    1,579
    Location:
    Australia
    That was our thinking
     
    Esh likes this.
  13. Esh

    Esh Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    19th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    192
    Location:
    Sydney NSW
    funny what some people would do to try and get their way
     
  14. Gill Bates

    Gill Bates Member

    Joined:
    24th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    5
    Location:
    Brisbane
    insurance companies also have a similar requirement - if a person claims a insured item is 'stolen'
     
  15. Lu Bracher

    Lu Bracher Active Member

    Joined:
    19th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    44
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Lol @thatbum - we are only property managers not lawyers.
    Fair wear and tear is what we are legally given to work with - s188
    We have to go to tribunal anyway to get compensation. My approach is just to make it clear to tenants who should reasonably pay for what.
     

    Attached Files: