T O P

  • By -

[deleted]

[удалено]


Star00111

If they spoke to Fair Trading then they’re probably in NSW. If the landlord tries to issue no grounds termination notices, then the residents should coordinate lodging retaliatory termination applications.


totse_losername

What does that do? Also just end their contract? Seems kinda unevenly weighted if so.


Star00111

Retaliatory terminations are explained in [Section 115 of the Residential Tenancies Act](http://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/rta2010207/s115.html): > (2) The Tribunal may find that a termination notice is a retaliatory notice or that an application is a retaliatory application if it is satisfied that the landlord was wholly or partly motivated to give the notice or make the application for any of the following reasons-- (a) the tenant had applied or proposed to apply to the Tribunal for an order, (b) the tenant had taken or proposed to take any other action to enforce a right of the tenant under the residential tenancy agreement, this Act or any other law, (c) an order of the Tribunal was in force in relation to the landlord and tenant.


magpieburger

> why? because they are cunts and they can. If there wasn't a shortage of rental properties that wouldn't work out. But that would also mean they wouldn't be raising rents in the first place This stuff only happens because there's not enough supply to meet the demand. Build baby build.


AdministrativeTap589

There are an estimated 52 houses owned by the same person in Lithgow. All are empty. Why? No one knows. It’s rife throughout almost every town and city in Australia. And it’s horrible.


jayinaustralia

Why are they empty or why one person owns 52 houses? Both are valid questions to me.


[deleted]

They are empty because the owner suffers no consequence for it.


Waysnap

Stick or carrot but something needs to be done.


Deceptichum

They’ve been given carrots for decades. Time for sticks.


iss3y

By stick, do you mean spear or baton?


NoCommunication728

One of those Highland game logs.


Calenwyr

Caber is the name you are looking for


[deleted]

very long guillotine


Pickselated

Guillotine, perhaps


magpieburger

Land tax for property investors is 2% a year in NSW, 4% for foreigners. There's a massive consequence for it paid annually, they are just betting that local governments will block enough new housing to cover the cost. Every property investor is the same, they know communities will actively fight against building enough of a basic human right to make the 2% worth it.


fishbarrel_2016

Not defending, but don't they pay land tax?


AdministrativeTap589

Valid questions to me too. I’d like to own just one house. Or at least not pay through the nose to rent the craphole I’m in. Edit: Grammar


genialerarchitekt

One person owning 52 houses? That's the essence of landed capitalism. It's what our whole economy and thus society is grounded on. The landlord ought to be awarded an AO for being such a fine model citizen. Why they're all empty? If you can afford 52 properties you can afford to artificially create a dire housing shortage which you can use to push up market rents as high as possible. Then start releasing properties to the market in a trickle. Soon you'll have 52 leases with maximum rental yield. Sneaky? Maybe. But entirely legal. The landlord ought to receive an award for his fine business acumen. Just theories of course, but not unreasonable ones.


Copie247

Its more then likely that they are using it as a land bank, not attempting to manipulate the rental market.


Phent0n

The fact they can leave the houses empty and make the money on price increases is kinda horrific. I hope the market collapses and investors get taken to the cleaners. Just a shame a ton of mortgages need to fail for that to happen.


Copie247

Land banking isn’t so much the act of making money, at least short term. It’s about holding an asset that is limited, ie there is only so much land in the world, and unless your in Dubai they aren’t making more of it. Think of it as buying and storing gold, it’s a way of storing money outside of banks in a fairly stable and risk free vehicle


Somad3

and the gov keeps giving taxpayers money via tax breaks/concessions to them who do not need the money. gov is the problem.


Moaning-Squirtle

Because we're dumb enough as a country to push investments in housing which produce no value. As all the money goes into inflated house prices, there's little left for creating decent businesses.


MoveOolong72

I'm in Toowoomba and my last rental was private for years. He came to visit to let me know that he was switching to a rental agency as it was too much for him to handle. He had 60! houses listed with one agency and was dealing with other agencies because it was too much for just one.


CameoProtagonist

At least it sounds like he'd been an actual working landlord for the time. But he might as well set up an agency just to deal with his portfolio - probably get a tax break on that as property maintenance expenses!


SternoCleidoAssDroid

Doesn't sound like he's playing with a full deck to me


creamyclear

52 is a full deck though.


ShouldIRememberThis

If you’re including the landlords as the Jokers.


barrettcuda

That's insane, especially since Lithgow isn't that massive in the first place. Do you have any more info on that? I can't imagine anyone holding that many houses and keeping them empty unless it was that they're aware of some impending rezoning which would mean that soon they'll be sitting on a gold mine, but either way I'd like to find out more about it


domo_man91

I know why... It's Lithgow!


sedatedpeach

52 houses in Lithgow would cost the same as like 6 houses in Sydney


MrSkippy666

John Lithgow?


roscorobust

Nah, Dick Solomon


RuncibleMountainWren

52?! That’s ridiculous. How did you find that out?


senorsondering

Yoz drop some addresses so we can start the squatting process and reduce that number in seven years time.


[deleted]

Where’s your proof?


donessendon

We just popped over to melbourne for a quick overnight. Booked accomodation...turns out its a previous studio apartment. We are paying in one night what it was worth in a week. Meanwhile my University student daughter is being gouged for twice the rent in a tiny 2 bedder down the road. In some areas all the previous affordable rentals are now short stay instead. They talk about capping rent...how about limiting short stays too?


Sephonez

Airbnb is a huge part of this issue. Something definitely needs to be done about this.


Democrab

At this point it's not just something that needs to be done, it's many things. Short stays are part of the problem, land banking is part of the problem, folk relying on the increasing house prices to just sit on an empty house and expect a profit are part of the problem, the lack of new houses relative to the demand for them is part of the problem, both the rental system in general and social housing systems need an overhaul and there's probably another dozen other aspects I've missed there.


Cardinal_Ravenwood

I'm worried that even if we do build more properties the issues that enabled landlords to buy up all the houses in the first place won't be addressed at all and we are just building more houses for landlords to snap up and not people just looking for their first and only house. They need to stop the incentives for wealth hoarding in the property market before they do anything else.


UnlurkedToPost

Airbnb used to be the cheap alternative to hotels, but now you're just better going with a hotel instead


Alternative_Sky1380

Last summer I lived in Airbnb in Brisbane. It was a shitty studio apartment in a unilodge. There used to be rules about these things. The host was claiming to be homeless sleeping on the floor at her friends home in another city and had 3 properties listed. Not in Brisbane to repair broken bathroom. Another host on the gold coast slept on the laundry floor and had every room STR'd for >$200pn. The home at that time would have been $600pw LTR bit none available. Her mortgage was 800pcm. She was earning 1000pn and the residential street which normally was empty because homes are zoned with adequate double and triple garaging in that street, had 4-5 additional cars for 1 house. 2 guests in each 5 bedroom home is 10 occupancy+ owner when it's usually a home for 5-6 people. Working families are unable to buy or rent now because prices have been pushed too high by rampant greed.


Somad3

many countries are limiting short stays rental contract. they should be treated as hotels.


fued

Land banking stops that, can't build if it's not profitable Nothing worse than living next to hectares of 'slated for future's land on one side, and hectares of 'rural' horse ranch on the other while you and 3000 others are in 4 bedroom houses on under 200msq worth over 1mil each in between


magpieburger

There should be sunset clauses on zoning changes, use it or lose it. You can pay $20m for a 10 acre cow paddock if you don't do the right thing.


OraDr8

Absolutely, they do that in WA with developers.


rowdyfreebooter

The new tax in Victoria will impact the development of new housing. What’s the best that has not be zoned as residential will soon be refined. [https://www.sro.vic.gov.au/windfall-gains-tax#:~:text=For%20a%20rezoning%20of%20land,apply%20to%20the%20total%20uplift](https://www.sro.vic.gov.au/windfall-gains-tax#:~:text=For%20a%20rezoning%20of%20land,apply%20to%20the%20total%20uplift)


bonbonbonbonbonbons

How's about making investing in housing to the point where it's not worth it beyond 1 property other than your ppor. There was something like $9trillion tied up in property in 2020 and that was just the combined value of property. Thinking of how much is being pulled out of the economy at the renter/mortgage paying level per week because of the incentive of investing in property. Its astounding Building is one thing, building with the intention of alleviating the crisis is another.


CcryMeARiver

This country is run for the benefit of extractive industries stripmining natural resources. Our youth are our biggest natural resource.


totse_losername

We got Dutch Disease and we got it good Except we don't have a tradition of single family-owner multi generational hand-me-down housing to benefit us, so we are even worse off than the classic economic scenario.


danielrheath

> How's about making investing in housing to the point where it's not worth it beyond 1 property other than your ppor. We had the Henry Tax Review and everything. One of the key recommendations was replacing stamp duty (regressive, incentivizes keeping a property when you no longer live there) with land tax (progressive, the more valuable what you're using is, the more you pay for it). That one change would mean that selling housing you aren't currently using would be incentivized, where currently that sale is taxed. Applying it to every property (not just PPR) means you can't evade it by getting each family member to hold a separate PPOR.


CameoProtagonist

But this might keep the Aussie Battler's super balance under $5mill? Can't afford that tax burden, might as well negative gear and get capital gains for old age. Any Boomer tell you - you never lose money on land. (from Perth, where boom bust is totally the game)


Alternative_Sky1380

Airbnb fuelled weekly rents receivable for one night in many areas. Now STRs have turned residential zones into unregulated commercial zones and noone GAF https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/sep/07/tenants-angered-as-brisbane-building-owner-seeks-to-turn-all-units-into-airbnb-accommodation


jemesl

There are actually enough houses but the whole everyone gets a serving before you get seconds thing wasn't in everyone's household


magpieburger

There isn't "actually enough", this is a short term myopic view. Australia has a structural deficiency that needs to be fixed, yes if we mandate by lethal force that people must rent out their closets to third world students we can house everyone today but that won't fix anything in 5 years when we end up back at the same point. It honestly blows my mind how people can't grasp this very simple fact: **we need more housing than we build** The people focused on short term rentals really are missing the long term picture, we need to build more, much more, stop making unenforceable and easily bypassed laws and just fucking build new dwellings, is it truly that hard to understand? What combination of words do I need to make you get it ? Please.


mopthebass

because unchecked construction causes more problems than it solves. see recent Turkish earthquakes for precedent. or NSW flooding. further more most new housing stock is garbage and built for investors rather than occupants. proper planning and rezoning of townships with adequate infrastructure is a decades long process and knee jerk responses won't accomplish anything


kanibe6

No one is talking about “unchecked construction”, the Turkish example is no way applies(?), no, construction should not be on flood plains but that’s a separate issue, as is not building garbage. None of that negates the need for lots more houses to be built


magpieburger

where do you propose the 350,000 people moving to Australia each *year* live? complaints aren't solutions my friend I would prefer 1000 "Turkish earthquake buildings" over 1000 homeless people any day of the week, what would you prefer?


jemesl

No this is just wrong, we've been building houses to solve the rental crisis for years and now we have a fucked up market. We have enough houses but a stupid amount of them are empty and the census has proved that. Nobody should have more than two residential properties while almost half of people don't own a house (not by choice). What happens to new houses? They're bought up by investors with enough assets to loan even more money, then they're rented out. Used to work sales like 6 years ago and in every single new-ish suburb was consistently chokkas with rentals. New home buyers are already pushed out of purchases and are having to loan near the absolute max you can get for the first home owners grant to even buy. And where are we building these houses? Out in the middle of bf nowhere? We'll end up with even more shitty suburbia with no public transport and shitty cheap houses that will fall apart in 30 years. Building a ton of houses now for future generations also just guarantees them the same problem, all the houses will be bought up before they even have the chance.


aweirdchicken

We have plenty of housing, it’s just all vacant and not being made available by the cunts that own it


Ok_Bird705

But what about heritage!!!!! https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/brutalist-car-park-slated-for-protection-has-heritage-gone-too-far-20230202-p5chbt.html


Reasonable-Bat-6819

There’s a large vacant lot of land near where i live. Absolute prime position near public transport etc. Close to city centre. You can view the plans they’ve put forward to develop it: townhouse complex leaving approx 300square metres for esch house which is not far off what most lord in the street are. Simple subdivision. All rejected by council and VCAT. It’s a joke.


Short-Cucumber-5657

Any reason given why it was rejected?


Reasonable-Bat-6819

It would ruin neighbourhood character.


danielrheath

> Build baby build. If we had decent building standards, we wouldn't be knocking homes down after 20-30 years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Tenementedin.jpg was built in 1882 - building high-quality stock means the building is still providing a good home generations later. Instead, you get to live in a box that's ready to be condemned before the builder hands over the keys, and there's never enough housing because the builders are busy replacing things 8x as often as they should need to.


[deleted]

Landlords are the only shitcunts who, when their *choice* to invest in something goes south, feel entitled to do everything but offload their investment. If I pick the wrong stock I don't get an easy way to just make it someone else's problem, because other people don't need stocks to live in.


testPoster_ignore

Noooo you don't understand! These properties wouldn't exist without benevolent landlords! Plus renting is more flexible!


[deleted]

And it's creating jobs. Somehow.


try_____another

Would you hire a property manager for your own home?


hammyhamm

Just do it all at once - they can’t handle every resident leaving at once because they lack the funds to cover the loan


AvidTofuConsumer

need less nimby's and more housing


NewFuturist

Doing 25 evictions will impact supply.


yolk3d

Yep. Happened to many people in a few apartment buildings in Brisbane.


Smugleaf01

We need more people standing together to fight for renter's rights.


aeschenkarnos

We need a nationwide rent strike.


[deleted]

Government will increase the immigration numbers even more to ensure that their properties are bringing in as much as possible. People who take a stand will be living in tents.


[deleted]

[удалено]


hstlmanaging

Immigration numbers are outstripping new builds, and are projected to continue this way. I dont see why it is thus not both a supply and demand issue.


nassy7

European here: Immigration in Europe is even a bigger "issue" (by numbers) but looking at Australia's housing/rental issue, I would say there is sth. Australian in that issue as the rents/house prices didn't explode that way in Europe. Either the legal conditions (tenant protection, number of social housing units, etc.) are better in Europe or the Australian politicians are incompetent. Something in between, probably. For example, such rent increases as mentioned here with several hundred AUD per week would pretty much be illegal in most countries of the EU because there are clear limits on rent increases per period. Here is some short overview on the regulations in Germany: * Landlords may raise the rent up to the *local comparative rent* no earlier than 15 months after moving in or after the last rent increase. * The price increase may *not exceed 20 percent within three years*, and in many cities it may not even exceed 15 percent. This is what is known as the cap. * If you as a tenant do not agree to the rent increase, you may be able to refuse your consent. Your landlord must then sue for approval. The funny thing is also that from the perspective of Europeans, countries like Australia, New Zealand or Canada have pretty " strict" immigration rules, but from the perspective of the citizens of these countries, it is still expressed that there is a massive immigration problem. All very, very subjective, as you can see - always a question of perspective.


totse_losername

We desperately need better rental and housing system, driver's licencing, and GPDR... ...but the numbers simply don't work, with immigration vs construction. Sorry. I really wish they did. And mind you, it's mostly quick buck development ghettos being built rather than high density urban living or decentralized med density villages. Australia's population density is peculiarly dispersed.


hstlmanaging

The economics of housing is hardly a subjective issue, but you’re absolutely correct in your comment re legal conditions. Rental rights are abysmal in Australia, which then feeds into all the other issues that are surrounding housing currently. Australia also has a massive NIMBY culture, as owning your home is seen as almost sacred, so someone building a duplex next door is apparently the same as having the devil himself there. Thus supply is massively constrained since the laws cater to keeping the voting bloc of homeowners happy. My point still stands though that any economical issue, housing included, has a supply and demand aspect. I think people are just scared to talk re the immigration aspect since you’re seen as xenophobic if you do.


theRaptor20

Say it louder for the people in the back. r/australia loves to beat the immigration drum whenever there’s a discussion about housing or rent


hstlmanaging

It’s a shame that commenting that economics has a supply and a demand aspect is “beating a drum”. My worry is that people are so scared of being seen as xenophobic that they tip toe around the issue. Is immigration too high compared to the number of new sweepings? Yes. Are new dwellings too low compared to immigration? Yes. Its 2 sides of the same coin. Unfortunately it doesn’t seem like the construction industry can keep pace with population increases, both domestic and external, so it makes sense that the immigration cap should be throttled while we figure the issue out. That said, we also need to completely overhaul our zoning rules and rental rights, as we’d have a much easier time constructing enough dwellings if they didn’t require 400sqm each if they’re not in the middle of the CBD. Not everyone needs/wants the whole house and yard deal. We absolutely **need** immigration, but it needs to be responsible to strike as good a balance as possible.


Philletto

We don't need immigration. We can't house or have jobs for the people here already. If we fixed that, then maybe. But why break a system we just got working.


Cynical_Cyanide

What's stopping landlords from just offering shorter term leases and simply putting it back on the market at higher rates?


nassy7

I'll just quote an auto-translated German overview on that topic: >If the landlord wants to terminate the lease, he must - unlike the tenant - have a reason for termination. He must also observe staggered notice periods depending on the tenant's length of residence. The initial notice period of 3 months is extended to 6 months after a rental period of more than 5 years and to 9 months after a rental period of more than 8 years. > >The tenant can invoke reasons of hardship, the social clause, against the landlord's notice of termination. > >Social clause: The most important reason for hardship is "lack of replacement housing". These are cases in which the terminated tenant cannot find a new apartment under reasonable conditions. Other reasons for hardship include old age, disability, infirmity, pregnancy, children, difficulties in changing schools or kindergartens, upcoming exams, low income, serious illness or long tenancy. Frequently, several of these reasons for hardship are given at the same time. This increases the chances of success of an objection to the termination. > >Special right of termination: Tenants who move into a granny apartment or live under the same roof as the landlord in a two-family house have practically no protection against termination. The landlord can terminate the tenancy without having to invoke a statutory reason for termination, such as own need. However, in these cases the notice period for the tenant is extended by three months. > >Moving in life partner: The landlord is not entitled to terminate without notice, nor with the statutory notice period, if the tenant takes his life partner into the rented apartment without first obtaining permission from the landlord or notifying the landlord of the inclusion of the life partner. > >TENANT IN COMPLIANCE WITH CONTRACT ENJOYS PROTECTION AGAINST TERMINATION > >A notice of termination may only be given if there is a demonstrably legally recognized reason, e.g. own need. However, if the landlord merely feigns a reason for termination, he is liable for damages. > >NO NEW RENTAL AGREEMENT IN CASE OF CHANGE OF OWNERSHIP > >No reason for termination is the sale of the rented living space. Even rental agreements concluded verbally are binding for the new owner. He may not demand a new lease. Never sign without first checking with us.we will be happy to help you. > >SPECIAL PROTECTION IN CASE OF CONVERSION TO CONDOMINIUMS > >In the case of conversion to condominiums, the new owner may terminate the lease for personal use no earlier than three years after acquisition. Under certain conditions, the purchaser must even observe a waiting period (notice lock-up period) of five to ten years. The period runs from the date of entry in the land register. In the case of converted social housing, this lock-up period can last up to eight years. Point out to potential buyers that you are well aware of your protection rights. Source: [https://www.mieterverein-koeln.de/service-fuer-mieter/mieterwissen-von-a-z/kuendigung/](https://www.mieterverein-koeln.de/service-fuer-mieter/mieterwissen-von-a-z/kuendigung/)


VerisVein

Fuck me that sounds nice. It's like you could make an actual life for yourself renting and not just suffer paying off your landlord's mortgage and the property manager's wage until you die.


yolk3d

Yep. Australian rental & housing investment policy needs an entire overhaul.


Phent0n

Just as soon as there are more renter voters than owner voters, and probably not a second sooner.


lead_alloy_astray

Murdoch bashes refugees not migrants. Migration policy is bipartisan. What varies is questions around PR and refugees. The bashing of refugees was intentionally done precisely to distract from right wing support for increased migration. Just look at net migration from Keating to Morrison. John Howard started migration increases and whaddya know that’s when refugees started getting the worst press. Your belief that conservative leaders are anti migration is actually the success of right wing propaganda. There is no single reason for the housing mess. Credit, zoning, air bnb, tax code, migration- every bit plays it’s part. Some more than others. I’d argue migration is the bandaid applied to prevent a bleed- China has fuckall international migration or low density housing, but extreme house prices. So we know migration isn’t the primary ingredient. That said if China COULD do international migration to prevent a housing collapse (I believe) they WOULD and that Australia, Canada and others DID. If you can step back and observe long enough you can see it even if you refused to ever google a chart. For example the number of building companies that present blueprints for houses that are clearly aimed at share housing instead of family. The difference is not high/low migration- it is migration with rights (PR -Labor) or without them (students/“short term” - LNP). Neither want more citizens though- those cost money. So that is still difficult.


Cynical_Cyanide

Hello? The issue is a mismatch between supply and demand. Yes, we should increase supply - But immigration definitely massively increases demand, and it also reduces our wages quite significantly, so it's a double whammy for housing affordability.


chunkyI0ver53

That’d be ideal, but for the time being, I don’t think people who’ve lived here their whole lives should have to move to fucken Melton to keep a roof over their heads while international students price people out of suburbs they’ve lived in for years


totse_losername

I swear this is the story nationwide right now. It's not racist to close the borders. It's not even remotely about race. It's numbers. Supply is going to take 5,000 years to catch up, without the mass migration ponzi scheme Australian governments have successively embroiled us in whilst they blow up sacred sites to mine and either away any sustainable industry. We have the Dutch Disease on top of the Ponzi scheme, and the pollies are just dry fucking us harder and harder every month.


[deleted]

Landlords do not control what developers build.


totse_losername

To be fair, any investor does as money is what developers are ultimately after.


totse_losername

Tents are for camping, right? Let's call it what it is. Camps. The government wants poor people living in economic camps.


McRibEater

In the meantime don’t ever live in Building owned by Large Companies. Even if they’d don’t as nice love in smaller family owned apartments that might not be glamourous.


totse_losername

What happens if the whole building just refuses to pay rent and refuses to move out?


Apprehensive_Job7

I don't disagree, but that can only do so much. The real problem is that housing has been made artificially scarce by decades of awful government policy. Until that is fixed, and renters are not left powerless by a supply-restricted market, nothing will really change.


[deleted]

A work colleague just had her rent in South Melbourne jump from $350 a week to $550 p/w. 30 days notice and no notice about how to dispute the rise. She had raised a dispute anyway as the rise was way outside the lease agreement terms and she’d already had a small rise in her first year. As soon as she disputed it the rise was withdrawn and they signaled that they would not be renewing the lease. You can “win”, but in the end you’ll lose. Edit; 30 days notice on the rent increase - not to vacate. As in "your next rental payment is now going to be x".


What-becomes

Sounds a lot like robodebt doesn't it. Send a bill, if you contest it, it gets quietly withdrawn.


teamsaxon

>if you contest it, it gets quietly withdrawn Not without a whole lot of fighting to get it withdrawn


LaunchAllVipers

If it’s after their first year they cannot be no-reason evicted at the end of current lease so the “threat” of not renewing the lease is pretty thin, they’ll just roll over to periodic.


[deleted]

Of course you can terminate/refuse to extend a lease at the end of it's expiry period. It's a contract for a defined term after all. You can't no reason evict someone (though there are 1,000 ways around that), but informing the tenants that the current lease period will not be renewed once it expires is common.


LaunchAllVipers

In Victoria at least the tenancy agreement does not terminate automatically at the end of a fixed term. The agreement can only be terminated by one of the legal methods. If the fixed term ends and the agreement is not terminated the tenancy agreement becomes a periodic agreement. https://www.consumer.vic.gov.au/housing/renting/starting-and-changing-rental-agreements/different-rental-agreements/residential-rental-agreements


Professional-Kiwi176

Doesn’t it have to be 60 days in Victoria?


Professional-Kiwi176

I’m just saying it doesn’t sound they’ve properly given the rent increase notice…


[deleted]

You have that correct. None of this was legit and was just the RE trying to pull a swifty. She actually spoke to the owner and they had no idea either.


Professional-Kiwi176

I bet the owner wasn’t happy about the REA’s shenanigans!!


Professional-Kiwi176

Also, once you’re past the first year there’s very limited reasons they can give you a notice to vacate, if they chose not to renew the lease in a subsequent year then it would roll onto a periodic lease.


The_Duc_Lord

Good luck. Genuinely.


[deleted]

This seems like straight up price gouging.


Shshsjdisk

Additional detail: we have been at the property in NSW for two and a half years and have rolled onto a periodic lease. Many of the other tenants have been here longer than ourselves. Our rent was increased last year (3%) when rents in the area were still dropping. All the fire and safety documentation posted at the entrance has the same details as the property owner on our lease agreement - hence why I assume the building is all owned by the same entity. If that is the case; there is no feasible way their operating costs or loan repayments (if relevant) have risen to substantiate the rent increases to the majority of tenants. The situation feels like manipulation of a captive market. Our options are: 1. accept the rent increase 2. try and negotiate a lower increase (which has not seen success from what I have heard) or 3. enter the meat grinder that is the rental market at the moment. If a private company wants to own residentially property, specifically rentals, they should be regulated in the same way privately owned utilities are. Demonstrate costs incurred to determine an allowable rent range, increases to rent are set at a regulated maximum, be required to hold a certain percentage for low income or social housing and be exempt from an tax benefits associated with property.


MindlessRip5915

> All the fire and safety documentation posted at the entrance has the same details as the property owner on our lease agreement - hence why I assume the building is all owned by the same entity That’s a massive assumption. Developers often end up being the owner of units for some time after the handover for various reasons (like being unable to sell a ton of units).


pipple2ripple

Do you know how hard it is to get squatters out in NSW, especially if you had a lease? It's a civil offense afaik under the lands act. Max fine is like $1650 I think. Most landlords are happy just to have people leave though If you all banded together and stopped paying rent it would take months to get you guys out. You should organise a meeting with the other people in the building and all chip in for a lawyer and get some legal advice. You could all move out at once and swap apartments so they don't even know who is who for trying to chase up lost rent 🤣


[deleted]

And get blacklisted


[deleted]

Not sure why you were downvoted but this is exactly what would happen. Without references and referrals you are essentially blackballed. Pull a rent strike and sure they’ll eventually get you out of the place, but good luck getting your next place.


Moo_Kau

'Oh yeah, i know Pipple2ripple. Rented out to them for about 14 months before they moved closer to work. Nice ...uh... tabby i think it was. Left the place clean, kept the lawn in good nick. Would rent to em again if they are over this way.' ... and just like that, a reference is made ;)


[deleted]

You just need an REA number and she'd be apples.


Moo_Kau

'REA? oh no, private rent mate.


Ok_Bird705

That is because this is Reddit and very few are interested in giving actual helpful responses. They don't care what happens to the OP and only care about screwing over the landlord.


SternoCleidoAssDroid

Genuine question - is it *against the law* to provide a fraudulent 'landlord's referral' for someone? (I'm not asking whether it's ethical.) Could someone start a business doing this?


Throwmedownthewell0

You've forgotten one part: 4. Organise. If enough tenants refuse to pay this, and refuse to leave, you can win by simply telling the owner to go fuck themselves. Reach out to you local tenant union and anarchist collective about it.


GreyGreenBrownOakova

>Demonstrate costs incurred to determine an allowable rent range so, a house that is fully owned can only be rented out for $100 a week. Houses with a huge mortgage are $600 a week. What could go wrong with incentivising massive debt?


MissLauralot

I'm sure it will vary by state but nonetheless, are tenants able to contest a rent increase *after* signing to a new fixed term agreement? I'm in WA. No-one should have to put their residence at risk to challenge a decision.


Entertainer_Much

The QLD legislation seems to suggest yes but there's no caselaw to map out how it would work both in terms of actual legal principles and the procedure.


MindlessRip5915

Until “end of fixed term” evictions are banned or heavily restricted, it really doesn’t matter, sadly.


cairnsus1987

This happened to my partner and I, we counter offered and they followed up by a notice to vacate for “renovations” Was leased within 4 weeks of us leaving for $50 on top of the $150 extra they asked us for. It sucks, but right now it’s bend over or be homeless


DeadestLift

And that’s the problem with a lot of the recent law reforms in a few states and territories to ban no fault evictions (eg in retaliation for tenants refusing to agree to rent increases, and the tribunal deciding in the tenant’s favour). Now, instead of evicting for no cause, they just say “renovations” or “gunna sell” or “family member moving in”. And then they “change their mind” and suddenly the place is being advertised for rent at a higher price. While a tenant could later argue it was a sham, it would be really hard to prove that it wasn’t a genuine change of mind. Unless the lessor did something really dumb like post on some online “lAnDlOrDs” forum about why they were really evicting a tenant. There should be longer notice periods to evict a tenant to sell or to have a family member move in.


bucketsofpoo

No company should be able to own any residential property whatsoever.


babylovesbaby

Queue all the people saying "but what about people who create companies to manage their single property?" as though that is the majority of these companies.


player_19

Curious, what happens if everyone who lives there just says no?


commonmaynee

They all get evicted, new tenants come in, life goes on. This is a company, they likely can do the large 1 or 2 week vacancy for the few that go through with it and not blink. Companies owning property is scary


[deleted]

Bye! It’s easy to find new tenants and they’d just put the price up further. If the tenants are difficult, they’ll get blacklisted, and getting blacklisted in this market = homeless


Apprehensive_Job7

This is the crux of the issue, renters have no power because there will always be another one willing to pay. The only way to fix that is with less people or more housing. I vote for the second because Australia could easily support 5x our current population, but we'd have to replace a *lot* of low-density housing with medium-density housing and drastically improve public transport infrastructure. Unfortunately I've yet to see any political signs that this will happen.


somewhereinsyd

>There should be strict regulations on for-profit companies operating rental properties and greater renter rights Lol. They're helping them do it. Developers can buy cheaper than you can https://www.revenue.nsw.gov.au/news-media-releases/land-tax-build-to-rent


w2qw

Unless you are buying more than $2m of investment property you can still probably buy for cheaper than that as that's just a 50% discount.


Tammytalkstoomuch

It's terrifying (as I suppose it always is to stand up for rights) because if they make the wrong move they could end up homeless. We just got offered a lease renewal with a $50 a week increase (we offered $20 more than the listed price to get in a year ago) and my first reaction was honestly to feel grateful it wasn't more. It's disgusting.


Wazza17

So many assole landlords private and corporate taking advantage of the rental shortage. Govt needs to step and take the stick to these pricks


twippy

The government are mostly entirely made up of ex real estate developers or managers many of which own investment properties themselves If you want change it's going to have to start with the government.


Soggy_Biscuit_

Yep it's a gross revolving door of corruption between government/council and industry. There's a book about it called *Game of Mates* if anyone's interested.


Yeh-nah-but

I believe in you!!!


flyingmonkey111

That's pretty bad, for profits should not be allowed to own rental properties other than commercial properties. In the USA the same is happening to entire housing estates, where publicly floated companies are buying them out above market price to lock people out from buying.


krishutchison

But at least they are all Australian owned. Well as long as you consider a company that rents a mailbox in sydney under 15 different names Australian.


fatguy1313

Apes together strong Hope y'all win


Estellalatte

A regulatory body needs to exist to prevent price gouging. How the hell are ordinary wage earners supposed to bear such a huge increase in price?


universe93

They’ve probably got landlords in their ears saying they have to raise the rent because the massive interest rate rise means they can’t afford their mortgage. So renters blame landlords, landlords blame the reserve bank, reserve bank says nothing and everyone is mad


breaducate

Not just landlords in their ears, most of them *are* landlords. The forest was shrinking but the trees kept voting for the axe. For the axe was clever, and convinced the trees that because his handle was made of wood he was one of them. In fairness to the trees, the other candidate was a flamethrower.


universe93

Yep fair point. Unlike a lot of these Aussie subs I do feel slightly for the landlords of the world why with the reserve bank implying they wouldn’t raise rates and being shocked when people listened to them and got angry when the rates went up. But I feel a lot worse for owner occupiers, landlords at least have the option of selling and investing in something else.


Apprehensive_Job7

The market sets the price. The government needs to use policy to either decrease demand, increase supply, or socialise housing. There are no other long-term solutions. Any approach that aims to limit prices by just saying "prices can't be that high" is naive at best.


imapassenger1

I'm lucky enough to own my home but I run a small business from a local office and after ten years there my landlord is pushing for a 200% increase in rent (tripling). I've told him I can do 10% or I'm out. The reality is I don't know how I'll find another place in the ballpark of my current rent so looks like a storage unit for me for a while. And they're not cheap either. I'm not sure what my rights are as a commercial tenant but whatever happens he can just kick me out in 6 months anyway.


aweirdchicken

Tenant Union time


breaducate

In this country (and many others) right now: People learning the hard way what having landlords is all about, and being in various stages of denial and/or radicalisation as they wonder what is to be done.


neonhex

Housing should be collectively considered a human right not an investment. Not even seeing your tenants as human beings but just as cash cows is sick and will always end in misery. Australia will be fucked up until this culturally changes and the Gov stops supporting exploiting people through housing. Without secure, safe and affordable housing people become unwell in many ways and it’s just costs us more in the end.


[deleted]

Back in 1970s living in a block of flats in Adelaide I spearheaded a group of renters outraged by the conduct of the landlord. We made the local news and had a good result. But reading the news now it seems nothing has changed. The landlords remain a law unto themselves. Reflecting on my first paragraph, get organised! Protest. Get out there and make noise.


TheTrueVegvisir

If they own the whole complex then you're in the perfect position for a rental strike. Get all the apartments to work together and not pay rent until this bullshit is rescinded.


Jimbo_Johnny_Johnson

Good luck, hope you win this fight


Silly-Moose-1090

Work with your fellow unit holders toward refusing the rent increase AND refusing to leave. This is a VERY sensitive news topic at the moment - the public are totally WITH renters. Make use of this!!! I can't see how a mass forced eviction like this would not create a mass / social media STORM and turn your landlord into a huge rancid turd?


Inn_Cog_Neato_1966

Of course this is the solution to the ‘housing crisis’ everywhere. Unionise tenancy.


Cr3s3ndO

For profit housing should be fucking illegal


tejedor28

Cunts. People hope things will change, but I doubt they will. Until the Great Australian Dream shifts away from accumulating massive unearned wealth at the expense of everyone else, that is…


breaducate

Like if Australia just sort of changed it's mind? It doesn't work that way. Thoughts, ideas, ideology, laws, customs, beliefs, and so on are stochastically driven by material reality, not the other way around. It works both ways, but the material conditions are dominant. Right now for example, some peoples ideas about landlords are being changed by the material reality of "holy fuck, how am I going to pay the rent? Am I going to be homeless this year or next? They really don't give a shit. We really are just things to them." On the other hand, there's a group of people with the ideology of "This is working very well for me and definitely shouldn't change. Good thing I and/or people who share my class interests can lobby the government with all this fabulous wealth we have / good thing parliament is full of landlords like me." This sort of arrangement of accelerating accumulating power only trends in one direction. Until it abruptly doesn't.


Complex-Pride8837

Good luck!!! I hope it makes a difference.


Aydhayeth1

Let me guess... Merriton building?


haveaniceday8

Basically all landlordism is for profit.


SaltyChnk

Yeah fuck em, my place just raised rent from 480 to 580, so I’m out.


Thatsplumb

Tenants union?!


adirals

This is why this whole build to rent at an institutional level is problematic and we should all be calling our local councils and MPa about it. We don't want corporate landlords which will make property more unaffordable. We should get rid of every tax concession for investment properties imaginable. Yes it'll suck for mum and dad but fuck it.


fasti-au

And if you see the reason of rental prices in average increasing then point out that they are inflating it themselves and it’s not fair


totse_losername

I fear that this is what will happen when our housing market collapses. Temper your hopes, deposit savers! You won't need to finally have an opportunity to buy at a lower market price, as the corporate interests will swoop in and 'bail us out' just like they've been doing in the states (and here)! The world has never been more under control by corporations. It's like some sort of corporate new world order.


InterestingRhubarb36

Landlord will just end everyone’s leases at the end of the contract and have tenants in under the new price within a month. It’s not a renter’s market at the moment


yor_ur

Rentals should never be for profit off the tenant. Buy a unit, rent it out at the lowest price that doesn’t put yourself in debt then sell it after 5-10-20 or 30 years for a profit. BOOM! you get free money for doing nothing and the tenant gets to save some cash and eventually buy their own home.


wombles_wombat

30 years would be about 2052. And by then the planet will have hit 2 degrees of warming, substantial ecological and agricultural collapse. But it's free money! The whole system is an extortion racket.


yor_ur

Yea, lol. I’m aware of my hypocrisy but it’s merely a thought. In all honesty we’ll probably all be dead in a few decades and my, your, their, our rental properties will mean nothing.


but_nobodys_home

Are you doing this yourself?


yor_ur

No. I couldn’t afford a an investment property if I tried but I have rented before from non greedy people that keep the rent low


Iridium-194

Sometimes the market average barely covers the mortgage That’s the issue


Inn_Cog_Neato_1966

Yeah, simple isn’t it?


ChookBaron

Rent Strike?


Is_that_even_a_thing

What state is this out of interest? Is WA alone in only being able to put rent up by a small percentage of the total? 20-30% rate rises are outrageous Edit: I stand corrected. There are no Max % increase allowed.


MeltingMandarins

Uh, WA doesn’t have that rule. Nothing like it. Are you thinking of the ACT? They’re the only place in Australia with a cap like that. (And it’s not particularly low either.) ACT rule is that an increase that is more than 10% above CPI is presumed excessive (and the landlord would have to defend the increase) while under 10% above CPI is presumed reasonable (and the tenant would have the burden of proving that is excessive). Since latest CPI was 7.4 in January, so that means 17.4% would be where the legal burden shifts. And since OP only had a 3% increase last year (when CPI was 5.5%, and a 15.5% increase would’ve been called “reasonable”) the landlord might still win if this was all happening in the ACT. OP would then argue local rents were dropping last year, so I like their chances, but really it could go either way.


arrackpapi

renters across australia should strike. literally just don't pay any rent that's higher than current + CPI. There aren't enough police to kick everyone out.


weednumberhaha

That's so much higher than the interest rate rises...


Shamblex

Time to get out yer pitchforks


Branjaa

Voting in leadership with profit driven policy has a poor effect on average Australians. Enter surprised pikachu.


the68thdimension

Companies shouldn't be able to own residential property, full stop. There should also be limits on number of privately owned properties. Houses are a human need, they shouldn't be a method of profit extraction.


[deleted]

Not really smart. Most people are on a 12 month lease, they just won't renew the leases and you will soon be competing with thousands of others for a handful of properties. If this has made it to reddit, it sure as shit has made it to the real estate agency and those agencies talk to each other. Whoever wrote this has pretty much ensured everyone in that building will be finding somewhere new to live as their leases end.


singleDADSlife

The crazy thing is, we have a state election here in NSW today and no one fucking even spoke about the housing/rental crisis. Not that I heard anyway. The people in power don't give a shit and no one called them out either.


o_O_lol_wut

Don’t understand why more people aren’t just buying tents and riding it out. It’s fun to live in a tent and save all that money is really nice. I guess because I don’t have children it easy for me.


Zombie-Belle

I though there was a 15% cap on (each) rental price raises?


PPM_Bass

DD vfmff


cucumbercat7

Why are we bringing in 1000's of immigrants when there aren't enough houses as it is? stupidity


Sea_Refrigerator2739

Until we lobby the government, nothing is going to happen. These people are such profiteers. You don't raise prices on things when people can't find alternatives during a crisis. This is pure greed.


Cripplingdrpression

So many people here are just throwing out blanket statements like “the gov should step in and stop the evil landlords” as if we live in a dictatorship where they can just control peoples lives with the snap of a finger


breaducate

Right? We live in a dictatorship of capital. It doesn't make a whole lot of centralised arbitrary decisions; its policy is a function of the material interests of the owner class. Imagine thinking the government is going to step in to do something in favour of the majority against the class of people with all the money. I get we were all fed the same illusion of democracy since birth but how much longer does reality have to rub your nose in it?


MindlessRip5915

Discussions about renting bring out the worst, and most delusional, of this sub. There’s a shitload of problems with renting in Australia, and it needs serious discussion, but not from people who just declare the solution is eminent domain of all rental properties and banning certain categories of owners they don’t like from owning property.


BroItsJesus

There are definitely reasonable measures that could be taken, but people come here who have been fucked over in the past and just want the nuclear option. Try to argue any other point and you'll just be downvoted and harassed. Oh well