Minimum housing standards

by Alison, 13 days ago
The Open Doors to Renting Reform community consultation has now closed. Thank you for having your say on how we can improve renting in Queensland.

Tell us what you think:

  • What do you think are acceptable standards for the condition of rental properties?
  • What standards of safety should Queensland rental properties be required to meet?
  • What should happen if minimum standards are not met?
  • How would minimum standards for rental accommodation impact you as a tenant, owner or manager?

The Open Doors to Renting Reform community consultation has now closed. Thank you for having your say on how we can improve renting in Queensland.

  • Rentslave about 1 month ago
    The photos advertised on realestate.com.au are a joke. Agents advertise properties with old photos misrepresenting the actual condition of the property. In many instances the photos are taken after a previous renno done years ago. This completely wastes a tenants time search for a property, especially if the search involves over a 1000kms of travel. The practice needs to be stamped on. One real estate was changing the suburb of a property to attract tenants. Another was renting out a flea pit in a disgusting state. For many Brisbane landlords, their properties ars nothing more than cash cows used for false tax deductions.
    Hide Replies (18)
    • Debbie Russell about 1 month ago
      I would like to point out that I have been in community housing, real estate and body corporate through out my property career. It is essential that you do not lump all real estate agents in with the dishonest ones. The price of the property will indicate if the property is decent or not. If you see a $250 house being renting in a major suburb then you know something is up. I have seen good rental properties trashed by tenants - with human waste on the walls, carpet ripped up, walls smashed to bits and then the $15000 bill is left with the land lord - is this fair no... but the landlord has to foot the bills for houses trashed by residents. It sounds that you are unhappy renting - maybe its time to try and purchase a property.
      Hide Replies (14)
      • Rentslave about 1 month ago
        You are making assumptions about my wishes to or not rent. No, agents should stop misrepresenting their properties on Realestate.com.au. Don't try and blame me for property managers using false advertising to attract tenants. There are no excuses for intentional misrepresentation,, and what you state is non- relvent to the issue of false advertising. The isses you talk about may happen, but your reply does not address the issue I stated above.
        Hide Replies (13)
        • Debbie Russell about 1 month ago
          This is where you are wrong - I am just pointing out the fact as it is for everything including rentals. If it looks good and a cheap price - WHAT IS THE CATCH. In this world you don't get good properties cheap; you pay for what you get.
          Hide Replies (4)
          • Rentslave about 1 month ago
            Sorry no excuses for false advertising under the Trade Practices Act. Photos showing run down property as rennovated on Realestate.com.au is a misrepresentation, its against the law. The onus is on the advertiser to tell as acrurate as possible, the condition of the property, and not misrepresent the condition of the property with outdated photos. Like most property managers your answer has a brass neck. Go learn the law under the Trade Practices Act, it may help you to be a better manager.
            Hide Replies (2)
            • Qlander2 13 days ago
              Rent slave ...just buy your own property. If you can pay rent you can pay a mortgage.
              Hide reply (1)
              • Rentslave 13 days ago
                Eventually
          • Scotty74 about 1 month ago
            Not the point of the comment - false advertising is just that, false advertising. I guess that's why real estate agents and used car dealers are covered by the same legislation!
        • Roxanne#1 28 days ago
          Dear Rentslave, When you use a name like Rentslave and complain bitterly about rental conditions, you send the signal that you are unhappy renting. Cheers, Roxanne
          Hide Replies (7)
          • Rentslave 28 days ago
            Ad hominem, can't you do better with your assumptions too?
            Hide Replies (6)
            • Roxanne#1 27 days ago
              I assume you don;'t know what Ad Hominem means. "Ad hominem (Latin for "to the person"), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a fallacious argumentative strategy whereby genuine discussion of the topic at hand is avoided by instead attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument."My assumption is that we are all here to explain our problems with rentals and try to find solutions that work for all parties, such as Tenants, Agents, and Owners. You do not appear to share that based upon your comments. When you give evidence of something it is not an assumption.: "AssumptionAn assumption is something that you assume to be the case, even without proof. " https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/assumption
              Hide Replies (5)
              • Rentslave 27 days ago
                Removed by moderator.
              • Rentslave 27 days ago
                No evidence, your assumption was based on the first assumption, please learn how to argue, and stop wasting people's time.
                Hide reply (1)
                • Roxanne#1 27 days ago
                  LOL!!!! Similar to Donald Trump you accuse people of your own misbehaviours.
              • Rentslave 27 days ago
                Nice copy and paste, the expression and style is different. More assumptions, when will you learn to address the blog issue, 'ending a fix term lease'?
                Hide reply (1)
                • Roxanne#1 27 days ago
                  Removed by moderator.
    • Cathe_78 about 1 month ago
      There ought to be some type of Award for real estate photography; it seems to be a highly specialised art form. I've seen some serious photographic talent displayed to make poky appartments look spacious, worn-out bathrooms and kitchens look pristine, and some very ... eccentric ... home remodelling efforts look like something from Grand Designs. I think there's a solid case to be made for something like the Archibald Prize for this.
    • thelandlord 29 days ago
      "For many Brisbane landlords, their properties ars nothing more than cash cows used for false tax deductions."Queensland is a big place and if you are going to have to travel 1000klms to see a rental property then I can tell you that Brisbane is not the focus needed for your comments. Also, the online company you are talking about does not care for the tenant or the landlord or the buyer or seller.
      Hide reply (1)
      • Rentslave 29 days ago
        Your first statement doesn't make sense. If Brisbane is the place, I am planning on moving to, then yes, Brisbane is my focus. You don't research Pat Pong, Thailand to move to Australia. What is your point? False rental property advertising on Realestate.com.au is prevalent in every State of Australia. The advertiser is still the responsible party for true and representative advertising of their rental property, not the host: ie Realestate.com.au.
  • Debbie Russell about 2 months ago
    I have worked in private real estate and community housing within Queensland and have found that most of the issues have been caused by tenants not looking after the property.I have seen a perfectly maintained property trashed by tenants in community housing causing in effect $15000 worth of damage where all of the windows, walls smashed carpet ruined and the owner is left out of pocket. I have also found wonderful tenants in both private and community housing. So it is the minority that is causing the issues.However tenants must remember that the owners put their property up for rent to ensure that they have somewhere to live. The owners do expect that their property is kept equal to the entry condition report as when they first move in.Landlords also must ensure that their property is up to standard even though they have been burnt (with properties trashed / rent not paid). If the property is not up to standard as a property manager I will inform the owner and request the repairs even though this could cost me a rental property in the portfolio.Property Managers also as a responsibility to ensure that the property is to an acceptable standard before renting to a tenant.However there must be changes to protect the landlord from any tenant using the property for any illegal purpose; Tenants also must ensure that they keep the property as good as if not better than they would keep their own property.Property Managers must ensure that the property is up to standard by the tenant and the landlord. Tenants also must remember that if rent is not paid then they will not have a home as the landlords are paying a mortgage.
    Hide Replies (3)
    • Angela Ballard about 2 months ago
      Why must tenants keep the property 'better than they would their own? This too is subjective. I know owners whose places are shambolic!This thread is about minimum standards....not merely acceptable standards (in whose opinion)
    • LauraPM 20 days ago
      I have worked in Real Estate Property Management as well as Community Housing with a non-profit and was disgusted at how some of the tenants would leave the property - the Organisation I worked for as well as the Government were providing people with a roof over their head and it was abused.. in most situations in the housing sector the bond is also minimal and barely covered the cost of a bond clean let alone the damage. In saying that I have also experienced tenants leaving the property in excellent condition - in both Residential and Housing - those tenants had treated the place as their own and were respectful. Putting the blame on the Property Manager and Owner is old news and has to stop. Tenants also need to take responsibility for their actions and understand they are paying rent to live in someones home. I also worked in Property Management in Canada for 2 years and tenants are extremely lucky to have laws and services in place that create uniformity. In Canada the tenancy laws were in place but it was often more in favour of the landlord as they had the ability to easily kick out a bad tenant. Here you have to wait months on end just to get a hearing date.
    • ChrisLyons 13 days ago
      We have rented three properties in our lifetime. The first property was absolutely putrid when we moved in. When we complained, the property manager explained that we were the first tenants for the new owner so they couldn't afford to spend any further money on it. When we completed the tenancy the property manager deducted cleaning fees, carpet cleaning fees and fumigation costs from our bond (almost half of the bond). This was approx thirty years ago.The second house we sold to investors and then rented it back. We owned the home for 19+years and rented it for 9+ years. The property owner spent less than $2000.00 on maintenance over 9+ years and then broke the lease due to his poor health. Twelve months later the property owner sought to deduct $300 for cleaning the tile floor and $200 for power used after we vacated the property from the bond held by the RTA.We are in our third house now which was new when we commenced the tenancy last year. The property manager refused to have the house cleaned or fumigated prior to commencing the tenancy but advised that we would be expected to pay for professional cleaning and fumigation when we come to the end of the current tenancy.There needs to be some rules that require houses to be supplied in the same condition that is expected when the tenancy comes to an end. The current system is totally weighted in favour of the property managers/owners.
  • JinglesMatilda 13 days ago
    Primarily they should be safe. Particularly things like electrical, plumbing and fire alarm systems for example that are outdated should mandatorily be upgraded, and/or any other potential hazards be dealt with before being able to rent out a property. Safety inspections of properties (particularly older properties) should be conducted by an unbiased third party and deemed safe for habitation prior to being eligible to be rented, similar I guess to property inspections required before purchasing a house. A certificate can be provided then to prospective tenants/real estates that prove the house is to a liveable standard prior to occupancy.Landlords/real estate agents that lease out dangerous properties should be fined and banned from continuing to rent any properties in future.As a renter it would ensure that properties that I rented were safe, I do not have an understanding of technical issues as I mentioned earlier and would be unable to tell during a routine pre-rental inspection if there was an issue with them.
  • Sharlene 14 days ago
    There needs to be something in place so that the standard can be checked before the lease starts. Yes people inspect properties but this is usually while other tenants are in place. I signed a lease to a place that was still being cleaned and having maintenance done. When I got the keys the house was very dirty and was full of mould. Locks did not work properly and when I mentioned it to the pm I was told its an old place, I couldn't expect more and if it was not suitable to break my lease and find somewhere else.
  • Mary B 16 days ago
    I believe that rental properties should have security screens on doors and windows. Ours hasn't, despite frequent requests.
  • Angela Ballard about 2 months ago
    (based on data from 230+ renters and my own long experience as a renter. 1) Acceptable/ Minimum Standards. No leaking taps, and top water efficiency measures if water is charged for. Regulation bins for rubbish and recycling; tip vouchers to tenants for clean ups (both bins and vouchers are issued by Councils to owners but they go astray and tenants are wary of asking for these as their right ); garden maintenance arranged by management where grounds are shared. Ceiling fans where feasible; off peak power; working stoves and ovens with bench space, light fittings; Insulation for heat/cold and sound (between floors)2) Safety standards - Safe stairs (including sensor lighting) and egress, safe flooring and decking (no holes to step over, no trip hazards, no disintegrating carpet or lino, no dodgy floorboards); security screen doors for secured airflow; locks on doors and windows, and mosquito screening where feasible; NO mould; safe electrical wiring and power points as per current standards (i.e, not next to taps), safe gas ovens and stoves, extractor fans or appropriate airflow; working toilets, ceiling insulation where possible, tested smoke detectors.3) When standards are not met. Tenants should have the right to break lease without penalty if minimum safety standards have not been met. If they choose to stay their rent should be reduced until such time as the standards are met. Then there should be some surety that the rent on that property will not increase beyond CPI for the next two years. (yes, loads of potential for gaming the system here). Tenants rarely get the opportunity to fully inspect a property before leasing and cannot know whether or not insulation has been fitted, the electricals are up to scratch, or there is a persistent mould issue or dodgy floorboards under the rug. These are the owners responsibility - to ensure at the beginning of a tenancy or certification period.Minimum standards will be meaningless unless there are compliance measures (eg third party dwelling certification every few years) and penalties for non compliance. The aforementioned break lease and repair arrangements might be sufficient stick for owners to bring properties up to scratch. We need to shift the system towards registration of properties rented....like almost every other rental item, with a bond for emergency or very tardy repairs around the basic standards. Cars need roadworthy certificates and housing needs to be certified fit for purpose also. 4) Renters can only share how a lack of minimum standards has impacted them and I have loads of rental data around this..... I can say my health has been badly impacted by mould not of my making, I have lost housemates because of dangerous stairs, poor plumbing and mosquito infestations - severely impacting my personal finances at a time when I was most strapped (and spending 80% of a scholarship on rent until I was miraculously offered a less expensive place to live).Minimum standards adhered to means significantly less opportunity for agents and owners to game the system by moving people on when simple requests are made for repairs, thereby never actually attending to the repairs that need doing. I would like to see third party inspections and certifications that agents and owners both need to ensure ongoing compliance with. I do understand that there are lots of investors and agents who will feel rankled by such imposition and perhaps this will signal either a willingness to step up into greater professionalism or to step out of the system entirely. With renter households paying out a minimum/average of $15000 per annum on rent, the least they should expect is minimum standards and an effective compliance regime.
    Hide Replies (11)
    • Lindajne about 1 month ago
      I love the idea of a CPI cap on rent: however how am I as a landlord supposed to comply with an 85% increase in insurance premium (not a single claim in ten years), increased rates, maintenance costs (thanks to ongoing Ergon outages)? We don’t receive Government funds to provide social housing - all our costs have to be passed on or we go broke and the house is sold by the bank... Some commonsense needs to prevail - danger of the law of unintended consequences in this critical discussion around rental reform..
      Hide Replies (5)
      • Angela Ballard about 1 month ago
        Yes, I understand the challenges, however housing is a social good, a social necessity and its unfortunate that it has primarily become a way for some to build wealth supported by the taxpayer through tax breaks rather than a way of ensuring decent conditions and security. So, its fair enough that property owners (especially those already home and attracting family home CGT exemptions) contribute....or simply leave the industry of 'housing provision'. There are other things to invest in.
        Hide Replies (4)
        • Lindajne about 1 month ago
          Social/ public housing is different from the private rental market. Is your contention is that every rental property owner is:a.Wealthyb.Supported by tax breaks?If so, the assumptions are sweeping and not relevant to rural / regional QLD. It needs to be understood not all of us live in the SE Corner - and negative gearing is the exception, not the rule.No benefits equals no investment. If the changes are too one sided and Mum and Dad investors withdraw (usually hard working taxpayers trying to put something aside for their retirement) it will only lead to a tighter rental market.
        • renting in queensland my thoughts 29 days ago
          The house I rent out is owned by me after paying for it with hard work. It is not a public utility. If the government feels certain standards should be met, these should be borne by all tax and rate payers, not individuals simply trying to provide for their own retirement without relying on government assistance. Re the last comment: don't be concerned, many of us are planning on exiting the market if we see unreasonable laws. The long term cost will be higher rent and an inability for renters to save a deposit.
          Hide reply (1)
          • Cathe_78 18 days ago
            Is it unreasonable to require that restaurants follow health and safety regulations? Is it unreasonable for building companies and developers to have to comply with building codes? Is it unreasonable for electricians to have to comply with electrical safety regulations? Why would it be unreasonable to require rental properties to meet minimum standards for health and safety?
        • Roxanne#1 28 days ago
          CGT reductions are for family homes not rentals. IF housing is a social good it should be supported by the Government. And if Owners leave the industry, there is less supply and rentals go up.
    • thelandlord 29 days ago
      One of your comments should be looked at by everyone. "Cars need roadworthy certificates and housing needs to be certified fit for purpose also". I do have a question though. If I give you a house that has a certificate and you complain, what then?
    • Rentslave 29 days ago
      Royal Commission into the real estate Industry, now.
      Hide Replies (3)
      • Roxanne#1 28 days ago
        As an Owner, I could not agree more! That would establish the real cost of rentals and the low, and often negative returns.
        Hide Replies (2)
        • Rentslave 28 days ago
          Maybe you are in the wrong asset class, try the stockmarket, it doesn't involve tenants. Lol. No use whinging, if you do not make a change, housing is not a commodity, its a place to live.
          Hide reply (1)
          • Roxanne#1 27 days ago
            Dear Rentslave, LOL!!!! Pot calling the kettle black!
  • LivingbytheBay about 1 month ago
    It is in the best interests of landlords to keep properties in good order. The property is more valuable for eventual resale and the tenants are safe and feel happy living there. It is important that tenants also have some responsibility for this too. They should report any maintenance issues promptly and should take reasonable precautions not to damage the property. An example would be to ensure the property is properly ventilated and not closed up which allows mould to grow on surfaces.
    Hide Replies (15)
    • Debbie Russell about 1 month ago
      As an agent I have found that residents - do not use the exhaust fans when having a shower nor open any windows what so ever in some cases. So this will cause mould to grow. It is essential to ensure that you ventilate your residence and not keep the air con on 24/7.
      Hide Replies (13)
      • Rentslave about 1 month ago
        You want the tenant's money but not the tenants.
        Hide Replies (9)
        • Roxanne#1 28 days ago
          That is an unwarranted, insulting statement. Debbie has a right to report her experience here, just as much as you.
          Hide Replies (8)
          • Rentslave 28 days ago
            And so she did comment, I just don't agree with a free-for-all to bash tenants. Many PMs in my experience are power hungry little individuals.
            Hide Replies (7)
            • Roxanne#1 27 days ago
              Debbie did not do "a free-for-all to bash tenants", you are doing a free-for-all to bash Agents. In this blog, as in life, you will get more respect if you give more respect. You are giving Tenants a bad name.
              Hide Replies (4)
              • Rentslave 27 days ago
                Removed by moderator.
              • Rentslave 27 days ago
                Bit hard for anybody to give tenants a bad name in this echo chamber, plenty of landlordx havr already made up their minds. Now can you please get back to the purpose of the blog and talk about ending a lease, or are you just here to troll me?
                Hide Replies (2)
                • Roxanne#1 27 days ago
                  Removed by moderator.
                  Hide reply (1)
                  • Rentslave 27 days ago
                    Removed by moderator.
            • Worfe 21 days ago
              Sorry but Tenants like you give every renter ma bad name. Debbie has a very good point about ventilation if mould starts occurring it can cause major health problems. Also, I suppose if mould does happen you want the owner to pay for the removal. No, I am not an owner but a Tenant
              Hide reply (1)
              • Rentslave 21 days ago
                I did not address the issue of mould, you are arguing with yourself.
      • Seaside about 1 month ago
        What proof do you have that the tenants are not using exhaust fans or opening windows? Mould growth is not proof that the tenants are not ventilating.
        Hide Replies (2)
        • Debbie Russell 27 days ago
          The proof is steam marks on the wall from the shower; you can see the water running down the walls; condensation build up around the windows and water pooling around the windows. Residents advising of mould growing on clothes and after roof is check and finding no leaks in the roof area.
        • Worfe 21 days ago
          It is a good reason
    • Cathe_78 18 days ago
      I am a tenant, and I DO ventilate the property (I'm a little OCD about it, actually). Whether or not this stops mould problems seems to depend on whether (1) the roof and walls are watertight, (2) the plumbing doesn't leak or back up, and (3) there is a water-proof membrane installed behind the shower. I report problems with any of these issues (or water leak problems in general) to the property manager ASAP, and SOMETIMES the landlord fixes them.
  • WBJM 19 days ago
    From the discussion on this page it appears there is a case for a building and safety inspection of rental property at regular intervals, perhaps five yearly, but the cost would be an additional cost to the owner that we should expect would be reflected in increased rentals. I did have a safety inspection done on a property. The results included no evidence of anything I would regard as requiring remedy. Comments and photos referred to the normal small family bath as being a slip and fall hazard, likewise the 75mm rise of the concrete patio above the drive. I gave the report to the tenant.I have had glass strengthened and a step that was a little different from those preceding it altered. Verandahs, steps, railings and balconies are inspected regularly and tenants asked to report on anything they consider a safety issue.
  • LauraPM 20 days ago
    Rental properties need to have a minimum acceptable standard for the safety of the tenants as well as covering the Property Manager/Agency. I am a Property Manager and have seen terrible properties that property owners should not be able to rent out resulting in termination of management as well as pleading with the landlord to accept the tenants vacating. I have also been a tenant myself paying rent each week for an uninhabitable property (deck falling apart, rodents, mould to name a few), I know this is a hard topic but it does need start with the legislation. Perhaps this could also create new jobs where properties have to have a certificate just like a car has a safety check and certain professions are regulated - the house or unit if over a certain age should have to have a compliance safety check which shows at the time of inspection it is safe to lease. Property Managers such as myself are not qualified to determine if a property is structurally sound for example so having something like this in place would be excellent and tenants could even look up on a government site the address and if it has had a certificate issued.
  • Worfe 21 days ago
    The Minimum standard should be a clean and safe property with minor repairs carried out within a reasonable time frame. I know tenants can be a problem, being a tenant there are also some good one that cares what sort of conditions they live in. This also goes for owners, 90% are good responsible owners, but there are also some that do not care. We have been involved with some great Property Managers and I think owners need to choose PM wisely. I know some property Managers that are based on the Gold Coast but manager properties Toowoomba way, seem a little inefficient
  • Qlander2 about 1 month ago
    Minimum housing standards? What about minimum rent that must be paid so it is worthwhile for a property owner to rent out their property in the first place? ....No, I can't see that happening either! Many property owners (myself included) are now considering the wisdom of renting out houses at all. There are so many better ways to invest that are not burdened by government red tape and regulations as well as being milked by local government and property managers. How about stopping greedy councils imposing rent taxes on property owners? In Rockhampton where I live the council penalises people who rent out their homes with an additional $800 tacked on to their annual rates. I used to rent out four houses ...now I rent out one and I am going to sell that one once the current lease is up. My Mother used to rent out five houses in Brisbane but now doesn't rent out any as they have all been sold and the money invested in shares which provide a better return with less hassles and no ongoing fees like rates. A friend of mine had three rental properties now he has none as he has chosen to invest in shares for the same reasons mentioned previously.Everyone has their hand out to fleece anyone who rents out their property. Council adds $800 a year to the rates, real estates take the first week's rent (plus gst) and then 10% of every rent payment from that point on plus various other "management fees", "bank fees" add to that maintenance costs, bank interest and 3% stamp duties when you buy an investment property. Why would you do it?My so called investment property cost $142,500. Stamp duty was $5,200 (approx), legal fees and bank costs probably another $3,000. I spent $9,000 improving the property putting in airconditioners, new stoves, painting and refurbishing. I rented it out for $190 a week (less agents commission 10%). My mortgage costs $450 a month, council rates takes $250 a month ($1,800 every six months). Insurance is about $100 a month. I am losing over $100 every month for the "privilege" of renting out this two bedroom house on 600 sqm.Oh you say I get a tax break? Wrong, I am retired..I don't have other income to offset. Oh you say I get capital gain on the property? Wrong, it is Rockhampton ...take a look at the property data - Rockhampton has declined every year for the past eight years.Are you starting to get the picture why rental property is getting harder to come by in Rockhampton (and probably other regional areas)?More government regulations on "minimum standards" and other forms of red tape like "energy efficiency" etc imposed on property owners will cause an exodus of houses off the rental market and on to the "for sale" market - then what will the government do to fix that?The government has been getting out of the rental market themselves by selling off their housing commission properties as quickly as they can and putting the burden on to the private rental market - if the "privates" bail and sell up where do people rent then?
    Hide Replies (3)
    • Rentslave 27 days ago
      Yep, all investments need close scrutiny. Nice to see you can own your investment decision, and you are ready to change investment classes.
    • Angel 25 days ago
      We too are selling our investment property because 1. we are at retirement time and the property does not even break even with its costs, let alone give us any income2. its value has not increased over the several years that we have owned it so there isn't even any nice nest egg to be made from owning a rental property. It is a large four bedroom family home in a very pleasant suburb that rents easily because it is well kept and beautifully presented. Any repairs are handled immediately, often between $800 and $2000 per item.Contrary to popular media stories about Sydney and Melbourne, there has been no property boom in Qld. If anything recent price rises have merely returned values to what they were pre cyclone, flood and state political upheaval days in the last eight years. Another happily-renting household will lose their home shortly because we see no point providing other people with a home that is far superior to the one we reside in. The fire-safety regulation coming into force at the commencement of 2020 will mean that we are required to spend a further $1800 installing 6 more smoke detectors/alarms. We have provided a home for our tenants in impeccable condition - we are not responsible for the actions of other people. Each year the property has a test and a certificate is issued to state that we have complied with our side of the contract. Should a tenant disable them, I do not wish to be held accountable. I have been cleaning other people's properties and often find batteries removed or the entire device clogged with cooking fat. This must NOT be the owner's responsibility. I object to all owners being financially penalised and held responsible because there are tenants out there who cant or wont follow their PM's instructions about being responsible with the alarms.
    • Worfe 21 days ago
      I agree with you about Government costs and they should be lowered. I am now on an old age pension due to health issues without any super, but a minimum rent would not allow me to rent anywhere but don't the cost imposed on you lower your taxes at the end of the financial year.
  • markbuzz 25 days ago
    I am a landlord and a renter. I think there should definitely be minimum safety standards. I've seen some rental properties that are supposed to be family friendly that are death traps. In this same way that you are required to install smoke alarms, you should also have to have a property safety inspection. As a landlord, I am confident that I have provided a safe property, so have nothing to worry about.
  • Rentslave about 1 month ago
    Tenants should be give a declaration by the owner, the house is free from the effects of amphetamines......ICE.
    Hide Replies (3)
    • Debbie Russell about 1 month ago
      This is hard to do - what happens if the owner purchased the property and it was not disclosed to them???
      Hide Replies (2)
      • Rentslave about 1 month ago
        They have a duty of care to their tenants and drug testing should be mandatory before listing a property for rent. Easy really, its a cost of doing business and proper due diligence by the landlord, stop making excuses.
        Hide reply (1)
        • Debbie Russell 27 days ago
          This is very hard to do - when working in body corporate our office was contacted advising that there was a drug bust in a unit in the apartment block... All of the 6 units in the apartment block had to be scientifically cleaned by experts to remove the residue that seeped through the building.If there wasn't a drug bust on a resident then the owner of the unit nor neighbouring units would have known about the drug lab.
  • Truben about 2 months ago
    A property should be clean, safe, and essential services fully and effectively functional.
    Hide Replies (10)
    • Fc35 about 2 months ago
      Truben, the current laws state that the property must be clean, in good repair & fit to live in, if not the tenant can seek a rent reduction
      Hide Replies (6)
      • GLTvl about 2 months ago
        Have you ever known someone to succeed at that? In my experience the agent simply puts pressure on the tenant - harsh property inspections etc. to find reasons for the tenant to want to leave.
        Hide reply (1)
        • Fc35 about 2 months ago
          GLTvl, Yes, I have experienced tenants seeking a rent reduction for ‘loss of amenity’
      • Truben about 2 months ago
        I am an ex PM, and I am fully aware that is the case, but there are some less than scrupulous owners and agents, that will bend those legislations, often because of money or lack of understanding of the ramifications of not fully complying. And tenants don't know that they can seek recompense. If you contact the RTA, you can speak to 3 different officers and get 3 different answers. I have also noticed, particularly in big franchise offices, their PM's have just graduated through the ranks, and haven't done the hard yards and see the role as a kind of power position. And the business owner generally haven't actually done the role themselves so don't impress on them the importance of the legislation. So there is a significant hole in on going training, not just for PM's, but business owners as well.As a renter, I am often horrified at how little some PM's and owners alike know about the legislation they are suppose to comply with. This then means that little or no information is made available to tenants or landlords about what their obligations and rights are. There are some pretty big gaps that need to be addressed from all sides of the equation.
        Hide Replies (3)
        • Fc35 about 2 months ago
          Truben, I both agree & disagree to certain degree with some of the things you’ve said. There are definitely inconsistencies with what various representatives at the RTA say on exactly the same topic, this needs to be addressed. As far as information goes, the information is there people just need to look. Each tenant is given a tenant handbook upon signing a new lease which clearly sets out what therir rights & obligations are, as you know this is required by law, whether they read it or not is another thing. There is also plenty of information on the RTA’s website for both tenants & landlords. Agency owners definitely have a responsibility to ensure their staff receive appropriate & ongoing professional education.
        • GLTvl about 2 months ago
          I agree Truben. And one phrase hits the mark regarding PM's seeing their role as "a kind of power position". I have witnessed many PM's treating both current and prospective tenants as inferior beings, it's clearly a power trip for them. I've found the rental real estate market to be an amazing paradox in the world of retail, and in essence that's what it is - the agent is selling a product to a consumer. But in normal retail relationships the customer relations staff are respectful and try hard to achieve good results for the consumer, because that will bring the customer back time and time again. But in rental real estate the service staff couldn't give a damn in the majority of cases, yes there are some who try hard, but they are the minority. Of course you will be confronted with unpleasant, and unwanted consumers, but they are the minority. There's no reason for every tenant to be treated as "feral". And in my experience when you treat people that way, you will bring out the worst behaviour/attitude in the best of people. As for education in the RE arena, I see plenty of pretty certificates on the walls, but I guess that is just show dressing. So for me the whole attitude of the market needs to be turned around. Treat tenants with respect and look after them, if they turn out to be bad then use the Legislation to being them into line. And tenants too need to understand the value of the owners investment, a bit hard to do though when the place is run down and uncared for.
        • Rentslave 27 days ago
          Here here, well said.
    • Gillian about 2 months ago
      I agree with you but the problem is what I class as clean may not be the next persons clean. I think there should be a mimum standard that states very clearly what is clean. Any issue that is deemed as un safe should be mandatory that it is repaired straight away, by whichever party is responsible. If a tenant has caused damage the same rule should apply. Any item that is in the home, dishwasher, air con etc at the signing of the lease should work and if it breaks down then it must be fixed. All items must be recorded on the entry condition report
      Hide Replies (2)
      • Jacquik about 2 months ago
        Current laws deem safety and security issues emergency repairs and major inconveniences allow tenants to spend up to two weeks rent fixing if the owner doesn’t attend promptly. Problem is most tenants don’t know. Both owners and tenants need more education around rights, responsibilities and tenants options to take issues further. If more tenants who are waiting too long for repairs sent followup just reminding owners - hi, I know it takes time to fix my dishwasher / loose handrail / leaking tap however it seems to be taking awhile. Can you please update me? Otherwise I may need to (choose option) organise the repairs myself under the agreement at your cost or contact RTA for dispute resolution. Most owners will respond and get action. The few dodgy ones the RTA mediator will explain that if not sorted under the free mediation a notice will be issued so tenant can go to QCAT and then they may well have to pay compensation for the inconvenience as well. Changing the law won’t help if tenants don’t know what to do next and owners don’t know what could happen.
        Hide reply (1)
        • Shakes about 2 months ago
          The major failure of the current system is the lack of penalty for breaching contractual obligations, and the tenants being retaliated against for excersizing their rights. A tenant kowing their rights is one thing, but excersizing them has tenants concerned about the fallout of doing just that, whereas the Agents, or Landlords are happy to hand out legitimate breaches without fear of tenant recourse, or retaliation. Also, it is becoming a legal WARZONE of documentation, additional conditions, and nit-picking evidence all over the entire rental experience. It is not simplified, creates undue stress, and complicates tenants lives. Why should a tenant feel they need to become a solicitor simply to rent a property? Most tenants fear excersizing their rights. Being homeless is what they'll get if they do!
  • Rentslave 27 days ago
    One antidote story I heard from a fellow renter states, a property manager told a long term tenant they must move because the owner wanted to sell his property. However, when the property manager came to the rented property to give notice, the owner was present. You see, the owner and the tenants were good friends and were sitting in the corner talking when the property manager stated the property was being sold. The property manager did not know the person who was talking to the tenants was the owner. As soon as she stated the property was being sold the owner jump out of his seat and said" who is selling?" That was one red faced property manager, and another example of lies and omissions by a property manager to tenants.
  • Seaside about 1 month ago
    Mould is an area that needs to be cleared up. If no leaks in the roof can be found, the tenant is to blame for not ventilating - even if this is not the case. Most hotels don’t have bathroom windows and don’t have ceiling mould issues. Why are tenants being told to leave windows open at all times - not just after/during showering? Why is it assumed tenants are stupid and don’t use extractor fans/window?
    Hide reply (1)
    • thelandlord 29 days ago
      Most hotels also have air-conditioning that moves moisture within the entire living area. This allows it to leave the bathroom. The other interesting thing about hotel/motels is that someone comes and cleans them regularly.
  • winnie4506 about 2 months ago
    I believe a rental should be clean and all essential amenities should be in working order. If you don't like a house because its old then don't rent it. Its like buying a house, you do a building inspection BEFORE you buy it. At the end of the day you pay for what you get like anything else in this world.
    Hide Replies (2)
    • Angela Ballard about 2 months ago
      a 5-10 minute 'inspection' is not long enough to ascertain the problems of a place. Third party certification of minimum standards required
      Hide reply (1)
      • Lindajne about 1 month ago
        Your suggestion will only push rents higher. We already have third party pest, smoke alarm, pool certifiers. Electricians, plumbers, builders are all qualified and employed to identify problems on as needed basis. An inspection is to check everything is working as it was on Entry, identity maintenance items and obviously identify that the house is being cared for.Tenants are responsible for reporting maintenance items throughout their tenancy - it’s their home and know the property far better than a PM ever will.
  • Detinman about 1 month ago
    This may sound petty but please, please....If you are building a 4-5 bedroom house please don't put in one of those useless fold away clothes hoists a home that has this many rooms usually has 4-5 or more people in it you really need a proper clothes line [hills hoist style] so you can hang your washing. Just a little thing but if no one mentions it no one thinks about it. :)
    Hide reply (1)
    • Cathe_78 about 1 month ago
      Amen to that! Those tiny little clotheslines really don't cut it – I don't care how "discrete" they look!
  • avava about 2 months ago
    As renters, we feel powerless. We help pay off the owner/landlords house and what basic living standards we would like are not relevant to them. A few of our current rental issues are; electrical wiring/issues, security screens, dead locks/locks, can't get 'contents insurance', unfinished repairs/ broken promises, not reimbursed for fixing issues with the property ourselves. The house and yard were never cleaned before we moved in. The previous owner just moved out and our landlords certainly cleaned neither the house nor yard. Yet because we have signed an RTA lease, the house will have to be cleaned properly before we move out, which coincidentally costs about the same as our bond deposit, which means our bond is lost every time we move. The house is only partially screened, we have no protection from mosquitos/bugs/snakes/thieves. We cant leave open windows unattended. Our electrical wiring is scary. Only half the lights in the house work. All power points must be held down firmly when putting cords in/taking them out. If light bulbs have to be changed, the socket usually has rust/falls apart/won't work again. We can't get 'contents insurance' because we don't have basic things like screens and locks, let alone security screens, deadlocks etc. So if something happens, we lose everything, whilst the landlords will get their insurance. It is a case, many times, of renters having to 'put up with and shut up about' and the threat of being evicted and black listed for wanting basic renter rights. Real Estate Agents tend to exacerbate the problem as well, pushing rents up and dismissing renters rights, all because renters are deemed 'second class citizens' as a friend was told by her agent. When a property is good enough for the owners to live in, then it will be good enough for renters to live in... : )
    Hide Replies (22)
    • foxje about 2 months ago
      Hi avava,I’m sorry to hear of your issues. I just thought I’d let you know that the RTA lease doesn’t force you to clean a house perfectly at the end of your lease. It only needs to be to the same standard recorded on the “entry condition report” that you would fill out at the start of the tenancy (required under the current Act), so if it was filthy when you arrived you are certainly entitled to note that down and leave it in the same condition. I’d also suggest giving your agent / landlord a ‘notice to remedy’ for any of these issues, it will help prioritise the repairs. It is illegal for them to take any retaliatory action and actually in my experience I find agents are grateful for having it formalised as it provides for a much easier conversation with the owner. All the best :)
      Hide Replies (18)
      • avava about 2 months ago
        Hello foxje - We are renting from private owners at present, we signed a lease, but there was no 'entry condition report'. We did take pictures, but sadly our computers hard drive died, so the pictures were lost. We wouldn't give our landlords a 'notice to remedy', because we know there would be retaliatory action. Of course that action would be under the guise of some other reason, because that has happened to us before. If there is a good enough excuse, then there was no retaliation. Of course there are some good home owners/landlords and real estate agents, but in our experience, we as renters are at their mercy, always. Thanks for the reply and all the best to you as well... : )
        Hide Replies (5)
        • foxje about 2 months ago
          Hi avava, no worries. Just so you know, if there is no entry condition report signed by both tenant and landlord, the landlord pretty much has no ability to take any of your bond, because they cannot prove that the property was in a better condition when you commenced the lease. No entry condition report = no bond payout!! Also if the landlord doesn't provide you with an entry condition report at the start of the lease, they are also in breach of the act so if they start causing trouble about wanting bond payments at the end of the lease, just politely point out that they are obliged to provide an entry condition report and didn't... :) . It is a pain but I recommend going through the Act or at least the RTA website to thoroughly understand your rights and responsibilities, because believe me, the owner has a lot of responsibilities and does not have free reign to do whatever they like. Cheers and all the best :)
        • PRT about 2 months ago
          I would suggest that before you rent again that you find out what your rights and responsibilities are as a tenant. You say that there "was no entry condition report", as a tenant you are responsible for requesting one, and if one is not provided by the agent or landlord you can get one and do it yourself.Many of the issues that tenants complain about are due to their lack of knowledge about their rights and their responsibilities. It is not always up to someone else to do things for you but for you to act in your own self interest and when renting, making sure you do an entry condition report and and exit condition report is one of your rights and certainly one of your responsibilities if you consider that the property condition is inadequate.
        • Truben about 2 months ago
          If there was no entry condition report, then neither the owner or you are protected. Going to small claims will effectively be a case of he said she said. My recommendation is to submit all problems in writing to the owner/agent, either via email or snail mail, also keep a written account of any conversations, including date and time as well as the names of anyone else that was witness to it, be factual and keep your emotions out of the report. At least that way you can have a historical record of any issues. And if in the case you need to go to court, you have documented evidence. For your own protection, I would also take photos of everything, before you return your entry condition report, take the time to name every photo with their location, it is worth every extra bit of time to do this for your protection. I hope that this will help you in the future.
        • Fc35 about 2 months ago
          Avava, if the landlord tries to evict as a retaliatory action due to issuing a breach, straight to QCAT, there are laws against retaliatory action from landlords
        • Jacqu80 about 1 month ago
          Hi Avava. It is becoming a sad and common reality for those of us who rent privately. We started with an agent & moved to private as communication & any problems were sort out easily & fairly it was great. A few years on , nothing gets done which is sad it's a beautiful old house & I thought we would be here for a long time. They had many tenant problems prior to us & as time goes on I'm beginning to think perhaps they were the problem. It's incredibly frustrating given they only live next door have completely renovated their house again 😕 we loved this property and it shows. It had no grass or gardens when we moved in & we since repainted and put nice new curtains throughout and the yards are beautiful and attract gorgeous wildlife and birds. It will be sad to leave but I'm no longer willing to love a property that the actual owners seem uninterested in.
      • Tammy N about 2 months ago
        As much as a lease means the property is to be left in the same condition it was in when you moved in, it has become common to anyone who rents that the landlord or real estate expect the property to be cleaned properly and often expect it to exceed the condition it was in when you moved in. If you then try to argue your case as to the state of it the entry condition report is not conclusive. It is a long process and often the bond refund is needed to fund your moving. A lot of renters know at the beginning of their tenancy that they will not get the bond back as real estate agents do anything they can to make sure the bond does not get refunded. I have even heard that there are property managers that claim they have never refunded a bond and are proud of that. I had a friend whos bond refund was paid to the landlord and the real estate refused to remedy the situation and now she has to go to court. She does not have the money for it and as her work is casual based is unable to take time off work as that means she wont get paid.
        Hide Replies (9)
        • foxje about 2 months ago
          Hi Tammy, if that is true about bonds being taken routinely then I agree something should be done about it. Maybe some timeline guarantees from the RTA around bond disputes which force the landlord / agent to respond to the tenant request within 3 days or forfeit their claim. Actually one of the few policies from Victoria I support is defaulting the bond back to the tenant unless the landlord provides a written request within x days. The bond is still the tenant’s property by default, the landlord should be forced to put a claim in for it. And a speedy process to ensure that tenants aren’t hindered in securing another rental.
          Hide Replies (4)
          • Kay Ritson about 2 months ago
            The problem is that you have to deal with the agents. Some of them will ‘blacklist’ you if you try to exercise your rights as a tenant. This is why it is rare for a tenant to issue a breach notice when a landlord/agent does not meet their legal obligations.
            Hide Replies (2)
            • Fc35 about 2 months ago
              Nobody can be ‘blacklisted’ for asking for repairs or breaching the owner/lessor. In fact it’s difficult to list a tenant & there are strict laws around listing on data bases. The tenant must have vacated the property first, they must owe more than the bond or the agent must have a QCAT order.
            • Cleocattra about 1 month ago
              I’m a long-time renter and I definitely stand up for my rights. I’ve breached agents on a few occasions and will do it again if I have to. I won’t be bullied by them. But it is exhausting always fighting for things. Despite that, I’ve never had a problem getting a rental. I’ve never damaged a property nor been even a day late in paying my rent over many years and I have my tenant ledgers to prove it. I’ve come to the conclusion that always getting your bond back, never damaging the property and always paying your rent on time is what is most important to owners. No matter how much a PITA an agency might consider you and no matter what they might say about you they can’t lie about those three things.
          • Rentslave about 1 month ago
            Its true alright, its property pimp sport.
        • Angela Ballard about 2 months ago
          "Bond Gouging" by agents and owners is certainly a 'thing'. There may be a good reason to retain some bond - ie for a property left in a mess, but renters tell me some properties are a mess, certainly not 'bond cleaned'. This begs the question why isn't the retained bond used to bond clean for the next tenants? Owners with properties may also be paying the price here...agents not fulfilling their end of the deal. And vice versa. too many power imbalances in the current system with no easy redress.
        • Cleocattra about 1 month ago
          There is very fair legislation already in place protecting tenants’ bonds. The onus is on the tenant to know their rights and to educate themselves otherwise you will be ripped off come bond refund time. If the bond in the case you mention went to the landlord then it was because the tenant didn’t dispute the claim. The RTA doesn’t simply refund bonds without checking with both parties. If there’s only one signature on the bond claim the other party is ALWAYS contacted. There are strict timeframes in which to reply. It’s up to the tenant to provide the RTA with their new address. Sure the landlord/REA make ridiculous claims on the bond, often around cleaning, but they usually back down if the matter is disputed by the tenant and goes to mediation. If you haven’t damaged the property and left the place reasonably clean then don’t give in to these bond thieves.
        • Jacqu80 about 1 month ago
          You are very right about the expectations when leaving a property. It is expected to be far better than you got it in and every thing is nit picked in an attempt to keep bond. I am a cleaner and I have seen this happen to many people it's terrible. It cots enough to rent or move or living in general without needing to be held responsible for things that are not "supposed" to be a problem. It is almost like the rules regarding understandable wear and tear especially if have been there quite some time have gone out the window.
          Hide reply (1)
          • Rentslave about 1 month ago
            Removed by moderator.
      • Lonsdale about 2 months ago
        Whilst the RTA may not force tenants to leave a property in a spotless condition, despite a property often being filthy on entry, too many agents try it on and threaten tenants with their bond being withheld when they vacate. By the time it gets to QCAT, more time and money has been spent, and the Magistrates at QCAT seem to favour agents, despite, in one of my cases, providing a 300 page response. Tenants ARE treated as second class citizens by some high & mighty property agents who seem to forget that most of us do the right thing. The places we live in are our homes and it's time property agents took a course in fairness, manners and the law as it stands. Having rented for over 20 years, moved over 12 times (ridiculous rent increases & nasty agents), I finally have found a lovely agency with an even lovelier owner, but they are very few and far between.
        Hide reply (1)
        • Rentslave about 1 month ago
          Do not wait for the agent to send in your form 4 bond claim, get in first and then they must answer to you.
    • Zoroon about 2 months ago
      Hi, as some of these things would have been evident when you inspected the place, suggest avoid this problem by only renting property with the important things you require, for example screens, messy property, dirty property
    • Deb62 about 2 months ago
      Deb62,I agree with most of what you say avava. Most renters have to rent. They do not rent by choice. Our home was sold by the bank to cover a failed business. We are in our sixties & have been made to feel like second class citizens also. Well maintained & cared for properties are out of our price range, so we have to take what we can. I think a lot of landlords know this is the same with a lot of people & they can do or not do whatever they want. They can also raise the rent (our's has increased three times ) & hold you over a barrel regarding eviction as they know you really can't afford to move. We have lots of maintenance needing to be done. We are not allowed to do it ourselves but can wait up to 6 months for handymen who couldn't care less to fix issues. We asked if we could paint our front door for Christmas visitors we were having. We got the go ahead mid January. I also think a property should be good enough for the owner to live in before offering it for rent. Landlords should be blacklisted like tenants are. You should be ale to access a web site & reviews on landlords before you rent a property. Our rent is always on time & property kept clean & tidy. We are good tenants but not appreciated at all.
    • Fc35 about 2 months ago
      The law is on your side with regards to everything you have described. Start with breaching the owner, you also have the option of spending up to 2 weeks rent on emergency repairs & the owner MUST reimburse you. You can also seek a rent reduction, contact the RTA & make steps to pursue this via QCAT if your concerns & breaches go ignored.
  • Dianne Mendoza about 2 months ago
    There are very good laws in place for tenants to ensure rental properties are safe and that all appliances are in working order. As a professional Property Manager we ensure our clients adhere to the standard. All tenants by law are entitled to compensation if they are not being supplied the necessities they are paying for. My concern is this language of “minimum standard” What does this mean? All tenants desire to move into a clean pest free property, however in my 22 years experience their is a reluctance to leave the property in a clean pest free condition for the next tenant. This is how the properties start to run down and tenants complain blaming Landlords and Property Managers. Landlords are already responsible for the mortgage, rates, insurance, repairs and maintenance. It is unfair to put the costs of cleaning and pest control back on them between tenancies. Also some tenants are allergic to pet hair. What happens if they move into a property that has pet hair stuck in carpet and blinds which I have had happen on a few occasions and become ill. Is it fair that the Landlord has to wear that cost as well. I really need from the Government some clarification on this minimum standard to move forward.
    Hide Replies (3)
    • Guinness about 1 month ago
      I moved into a fully furnished unit which, at the time of inspection, had no oven or stove top but had a bbq on the deck. When I moved in the bbq was gone. I raised this with the property manager who eventually responded to say that they owners had decided to take it out. By this time I had already moved in and was too scared to take it any further. Since then I have discovered electrical issues and the pool in the complex is out of order. Over time my circumstances have changed and I have replaced much of the furniture with my own items and have had to put the rest in storage at my own expense. I am paying at least $50 more than any other unit in the complex (based on the advertised prices I have seen). So, I am now renting a place with no oven or cooktop, no pool, I have replaced all the furnishings so it is now essentially unfurnished, but when I raised the possibility of getting a rent reduction, the property owner has failed, multiple times, to respond. The only leverage I have is to move, but that sucks. I genuinely like the place so am stuck paying well above market rent or face a battle with the property manager and face possible eviction. Ie. I just keep paying the rent and have given up trying to get anything fixed or addressed. Minimum standards, together with protection from eviction without grounds and better (non-court) avenues to resolve disputes would be amazing.
      Hide Replies (2)
      • Dianne Mendoza about 1 month ago
        Hi GuinnessI am very puzzled by this as under current legislation each day you go without an oven, cooktop and not being able to use the pool you are entitled to compensation. It just takes a little effort on your part.
      • Debbie Russell about 1 month ago
        I think it is about time you go to the Tenants QLD - https://tenantsqld.org.au/contact-us/TQ statewide advice service for tenantsPh: 1300 744 263As renters you should know that this service exists - and they will be able to help you. You can also breach your agent and landlord for the lack of cooking facilities if they have been removed. Swimming pools in unit complexes are not the responsibility of your land lord as he is only a part owner of the pool. All of the owners within the unit complex is responsible for the maintenance of the swimming pool.
  • foxje about 2 months ago
    I think setting 'minimum standards' will put everyone in a box and produce bad outcomes for tenants and for landlords. It does not take into account unique personal viewpoints and diverse experiences. For example, I am part owner in an old unit block, in a beautiful waterfront location where tenants can sit on their balcony or the back yard and look out over uninterrupted waterviews. The tenants are all pensioners or on low incomes. The reason the rent is low is because each unit does not have an internal bathroom - it has an external amenities block. Now, if you set minimum standards requiring, for example, the owners to install new bathrooms in each of the units, they could charge 50% more rent because everyone would want to live there, and the existing tenants would have to move elsewhere. Some people look at that and say "No way I could live with having to walk outside to another building to go to the bathroom or shower", however, the tenants are extraordinarily happy to be able to live in such a beautiful place and couldn't actually care less about the bathroom situation. Don't impose your views on theirs. Setting minimum standards will stop mutually beneficial arrangements like this from happening. The market will regulate itself - bad properties will have long vacancies and lower rent. Good properties will have short vacancies and higher rent. Part-good and part-bad properties will be subject to negotiation between tenants and owners. Setting minimum standards will remove an important segment of the market and force people into caravan parks or their cars or short stay accommodation.
    Hide Replies (11)
    • Van about 2 months ago
      Foxje, thank you for your contributions to the debate. It is interesting for me as a tenant to hear from the owners and agents, as we don't get to talk to each other very often. The place you describe sounds quite beautiful. However, I don't think these types of homes are what will be targeted by the proposal to introduce minimum standards. For me anyway, I think minimum standards are things like providing deadlocks on all external doors (or the equivalent for sliding doors), screens to keep out insects, animals and burglars, and good curtains or blinds to block out light and heat. Basic stuff that will allow tenants to live comfortably and safely.I also think we have to be really careful about allowing the market to regulate itself. That only works if the tenant has the power to go elsewhere. If you're well off and live in an area with a good supply of rental homes, you're probably going to be okay. If you're not well off you often have to take what you can afford, regardless of what state it is in. That gets even worse when the rental market is tight, when even well-off renters can struggle to find a quality rental home. I consider the property I live in now meets an acceptable basic standard, and I appreciate that the landlord has taken the effort to make it that way. I have not been so lucky in the past. In return for those efforts, the landlord has a good, stable tenant who has been in place for three years. For that reason I wholeheartedly approve of basic minimum standards.
      Hide Replies (8)
      • Zoroon about 2 months ago
        RE "......like providing deadlocks on all external doors ......" are a fire trap. I know insurance companies want them, but I make sure at my place that a key is not needed to get out of the house..RE "....a good supply of rental homes..." Government needs to build more housing, particularly for low income people.Some of these proposed changes will have the effect of reducing the supply of new rental homes. This will take a few years to flow thru. This will happen because a certain investors will reduce investment in new house/ units and invest in other asset class's.
      • foxje about 2 months ago
        Hi Van, thanks for your well thought out response. I hope that any proposal to introduce minimum standards takes into account different people' different needs. Even - for example - insect screens - my wife and I don't live with insect screens and would not want to pay more for a rental property with one. It really is such an individual thing that I struggle to think the government will be able to legislate effectively without introducing a whole other set of issues! You are right with the free market in terms of the tenant needing an alternative place to be able to negotiate effectively. However if you dampen that side of the market, you don't get an adequate response to build more properties which only amplifies the problem. It's been interesting going through the posts to hear the tenants' perspective as well. I think there is scope for a "Good Landlords / Good Tenants" database - much like the "Bad tenants" database we hear about. Nearly every owner I talk to would be more than willing to lower rent, make upgrades to the properties, etc, if there is a great tenant. We just need to connect the great tenants and the great owners !! :-)
        Hide Replies (3)
        • Kay Ritson about 2 months ago
          Sorry, but in Qld, insect screens should be mandatory. Do you want your tenants to burn citronella candles or mossie coils and burn your house down? Do you want your tenants exposed to insect born diseases like Ross River Fever? as for ‘Amenity blocks’ it sounds like your property used to be a caravan site, I hope the rents are comparable. I feel sorry for any incontinent elderly person forced to rent your unit.
          Hide reply (1)
          • Jacqu80 about 1 month ago
            Kay I completely agree with you regarding Flyscreens. I think they should be in all rental properties be it new or old. I rent a beautiful old Queenslander that we can not open up & let the breeze through in summer, storms, rain or after dusk as it is mossie central. I have offered to make suitable screens as I have the skills to do so if the owners would supply the materials. Sadly this has not occurred however they have lovely new screens fitted in their home not because of damaged old ones but they went with the new colour scheme. I understand that not every want or wish can be fulfilled for tenants however owners are crazy not to look after loyal long term tenants when you know they look after your property & always pay their rent even if the basic repairs are not done let alone wanting Flyscreens 😕
        • Angela Ballard about 2 months ago
          So true foxje. There are 'rental apps' coming and my research group came to the same conclusion re connecting owners and tenants. The system being so mediated by agents does not allow for the best outcomes for tenants. The best outcomes are where a good relationship between owners and renters can be established, understandings are developed (Ie...I want to stay for at least three years because thats how long my work contract is for) and issues negotiated fairly. Such arrangements however need to based in truth and good standards....eg no locking in of a lease if black mould is causing health issues)
      • Debbie Russell about 2 months ago
        Yes deadlocks are a fire hazard - however there is a product called a deadlatch - this works like a deadlock but will allow the tenant to open from the inside of the property. These are usually installed within units with fire doors but can be installed into normal housing.
        Hide Replies (2)
        • Zoroon about 1 month ago
          A deadlatch does not meat insurance company requirements.
        • GaryLindsay about 1 month ago
          You can leave a key in the back side of a dead lock, or just leave the dead lock open when people are home.
    • Angela Ballard about 2 months ago
      foxje, good points made.... However, it sounds like you are talking about 'rooming accommodation' or caravan park accommodation - not standard fully self contained rental housing. If those bathrooms were rusted and mouldy and the doors didn't lock and the tiles were cracked and sharp then those things need attending to. This is about safety, not necessarily amenity. Having grown up in caravan park next to the beach as a kid the fact that I had to walk to the loo with a torch didn't bother me at all.
    • Cleocattra about 1 month ago
      Never ever heard of what you describe being called a ‘unit block’. Sounds like a caravan park with cabins maybe!
  • Sanch about 1 month ago
    I'm out. I wish you well with your research, but am done.As you have stated, the loint is to ask people what they would live in, but no one really wants to hear.
  • DebbieP about 2 months ago
    I believe the current legislation is sufficient regarding the condition of rental properties. Minimum standards being set would impact on rental prices as the only way to guarantee a minimum standard would be to have a building inspection annually so the price would be passed on. It would also have yet another impact to the responsibilities of Real Estate Agents.
    Hide Replies (7)
    • Sanch about 2 months ago
      Rubbish.That sounds like fear from either an Agent or Owner.If people are greedy and unscrupulous, they will bring this upon themselves.
      Hide Replies (4)
      • DebbieP about 2 months ago
        I thought this forum was so all three parties could have a say, not to be bullied or rubbished if you have an opinion that is not shared by yourself. I can only speak from my perspective and what I experience which may or may not be the same as yours.
        Hide Replies (2)
        • Sanch about 2 months ago
          DebbieP, my intention was not to be rude, and if you feel I have been, I apologise.I do believe that there should be minimun standards. I have known people with huge Rental Portfolios, of what are basically slums. Dreadful. These people themselves live like pigs so it is really difficult,I think that showers should be clean and rust free, kitchens should have full working ovens , preferably post 2000, after all, it is now 2018. I have seen heating units in Melbourne from pre 1970, in areas which are commanding top rentals. I think setting a minimum standard, and holding people accountable for maintaining these standards, wont raise rents, but will pull all 3 parties, Owners, Agents and Tenants, into line.
          Hide reply (1)
          • GaryLindsay about 1 month ago
            If people want to pay for those things there is nothing stopping them from finding a better rental property, but it will cost more. Some people don't need cooking facilities because they eat out every night.Don't push your opinion of what makes a good property onto others.
      • ChristineA about 1 month ago
        So, do you have anything constructive to share?
    • Angela Ballard about 2 months ago
      There is no current legislation in relation to the condition of rental properties. That's the point of this exercise...to ascertain WHAT minimum standards are needed. Perhaps ask yourself what would you mind living in?
      Hide reply (1)
      • rkelly12 about 2 months ago
        There is actually many requirements under many different acts not just the RTA act in which need to be met to be able to rent a property out. The real estate industry is not governed by Tenancy laws but fire compliance laws, by body corporate laws, local government laws which can differ in different suburbs and areas. There is clearly a lack of understanding from many parties on property owners have control of on their properties and what they do not. (I have recently become a property owner and was shocked to find some of the things I would have to get approved at my own property)There are many agents out there that pride themselves on the type of properties they offer, and on having maintenance actioned quickly, and that help tenants and offer then advice, and most definitely treat them with the same respect as an owner. As far as I am aware also a minimum house standard bill was passed earlier in the year prior to the review of the laws, which people should look into.
  • GaryLindsay about 1 month ago
    Mandating minimum standards is no different to telling people who want (or need if that is all they can afford) a cheap but low quality place to live. Implementing them is telling poor people that they do not deserve to rent a house.It is naive to think that mandatory standards will not result in higher rents. Increasing the cost to owners will mean owners will seek to cover their costs. Prices always move to equilibrium, so while the price rise might not happen straight away it will happen over one or two years.
  • Pigsmightfly about 1 month ago
    I consider disclosure on whether the home has been flooded and therefore possibly issues with mould necessary. Keys must be professional keys that can’t be copied and kept by previous tenants. This is a personal safety issue. Clean and mould free bathroom with fan, screens on windows and doors and deadlocks, clean carpets that aren’t stained and smelly, pest control done, safe decks and stairs, insulated, gardens maintained (not overgrown with weeds and tall grass in which snakes and ticks hide), scheduled professional inspections of gas appliances and chimneys/flues. Also, any unlawful entry by landlord/RE to be punished by a rent free month to tenants as this negates ones personal safety. Blinds that work in every room, disclosure re asbestos, and re any violent crime committed in the property.
  • Jac1 about 2 months ago
    Acceptable standards entails clean, everything that should open and shut works, paint in good condition, no asbestos buildings, floors no gaps, appliances working and clean, pest control done, yard and plants kept to a minimum for easy maintenance and good security and fenced.Safety - locks on doors and good screens, smoke alarms.Standards - the property should not be rented and owner or RE penalised by allowing renter time to seek another property, bond returned to assist find another property and a reduction in rent due to the poor standard of the property.The RTA terms and conditions are discussed and provided to all parties and signed. The tenant should also be allowed more time to view properties and the owner/RE should hand each potential tenant a form detailing issues with the property so they can make a decision and not waste time and money moving.
    Hide Replies (3)
    • Angela Ballard about 2 months ago
      Yep...all the above - well thought through Jac1
      Hide reply (1)
      • Sanch about 2 months ago
        I agree with almost all of the above, but asbestos is a difficut one. Some properties have asbestos and it is in extremely good condition. Asbestos only becomes a problem when there is damage and therefore dust can escape. Should that happen, then yes, it must be removed, tenants either temporarily relocated, or assisted to relocate. Their choice.
    • ahl about 1 month ago
      Ruling out asbestos would rule out most pre 1990 buildings in Queensland, so that will definitely affect the rental market not to mention owner occupiers - and most of us grew up with it.. But yes it should be safe. "And plants and yard kept to a minimum"? Surely that is a personal preference when looking for a place to rent. ditto screens. Smoke alarms already governed by law including being upgraded over the next few years at owners cost.
  • Guinness about 1 month ago
    I think "acceptable standards" means safe, clean, in good working order, private (appropriate window coverings or screens), and comfortable (insulation, good air flow and or ceiling fans/energy efficient air conditioning, good quality flooring, no gaps or cracks in flooring etc) and a flexible design so that you can personalise the property by hanging some art work and having neutral colours on walls etc.Safety standards should include security screens / doors where appropriate for comfort/safety, all locks (inc. windows) in working order, safe electrical outlets, light switches and showers and regular maintenance of electrical items eg. air conditioners, hot water systems and ovens.If minimum standards are not met the tenant should be able to easily obtain a notice to rectify giving the owner a reasonable amount of time to respond. If an owner did not rectify the issue in the appropriate timeframe there should be a process to reduce the rent until they do (down to $0 for something urgent such as something being unsafe).It is impossible as a tenant to inspect a property and immediately identify all that may need fixing in an initial inspection, or even soon after. You are usually so desperate to find somewhere that you just take it as it, and then feel too nervous to raise any issues for fear that they may think badly of you and not renew your lease. Having a sound basis and process to raise issues (and hold the owner/property manager to account) would be amazing.
    Hide reply (1)
    • Dianne Mendoza about 1 month ago
      Their is already a sound basis to raise these issues. Have you never spoken to the Residential Tenancies Authority Guinness.Their is also a big difference in expectations of a renter paying $250.00 per week for a property compared to a renter paying $850.00 per week.
  • Alan Pridmore about 1 month ago
    We are Landlords, Registered Real estate agent & Builders. There should be minimum standards on both sides Landlord & Tenants. Why does our Qld Government always look at making 2 x sides divided. Seriously it is a crock!!! We have been Landlords for 20 years. We keep our Rental Properties to a standard. We keep our houses to a standard that we would expect to live in period!! Maintained when needed. Gardens trim-up every 14 to 16 weeks. Tenants responsible for weeds,edging & lawns. There needs to be some Government body that goes around to reported bad repeat offender Landlords & Tenants. It should be like building a new house some sort of criteria that is put in place before Landlord rents their Rental property out. The standard should be set at the beginning of property being available to Rent & Inspection at end when Tenant vacates & Landlord has reported the property not being left in a fit state. There are lot of fantastic Tenants & Landlords but I am simply sick of the bad ones making life hard for all. Landlords it is your investment & business treat it like that & present your property & maintain accordingly. Tenants treat the house with respect which means cleaning, gardens & what is required to maintain a home in a good condition. At the end of the day it is about communication with both parties. QCAT has enough hearings that they can't keep up with. Do the right thing on both sides no one has to go there. If the Landlord or Tenant doesn't meet the minimum standard for the Rental Property in question then some sort of fine should be paid or Landlord not able to rent the Rental Property out until the standard is met & inspected by Queensland Government body. Tenant should have to prepare the property back as the minimum standard at the end example cleaning, gardens & damage rectified etc. Landlord reporting to Queensland Government body if the property is not in that standard it was given at beginning of Lease. The REIQ & RTA Leases are very vague on any cleaning & maintenance of the property while rented. I to myself have had bad Tenants we move them on. But we always have that house up to high standard on renting again. Landlords & Tenants don't be lazy do the right thing by the Rental Property in question & then it is a win win for everyone.
  • Chris Ross about 1 month ago
    Acceptable standards = clean and well maintained. Unfortunately getting that across to landlords appears impossible and if their Property Manager fails to advise their client that the property is sub standard then they're are not doing their job.Safety = Locks that work on all doors and windows incl security screen doors and current smoke alarmsMinimum standards not met = the property is not lettable.Minimum standards = a very bad description and should not be tolerated.The rent does not matter the property should always be clean and well maintained.The basic Landlord has a lot to answer for but then again, so too does the basic tenant. There should always be give and take and there should always be negotiation. Never be afraid to negotiate.Response to Qlander2.Council's do not provide any benefit to an investor/owner or indeed a tenant. So why does GCCC charge an extra $336 per annum? I agree with you on that one!
  • Van about 2 months ago
    Minimum standards would probably vary a little, depending on location. For example, I don't think there's much point in requiring landlords to install heating in coastal Far North Queensland, whereas it might be required further south, in mountainous areas and inland. My proposed list would include: deadlocks on all external doors (or the equivalent for sliding doors) and any other locks that are required for a tenant to get contents insurance in the area they rent in; window screens and screen doors on all windows and doors to keep out insects, animals and burglars; a working stove; curtains and/or blinds for privacy and to block out light and heat; and heating/cooling appropriate to the climate. All rental properties should already have smoke detectors and residual current devices, but there are still some out there that do not. The property should be mould-free. If the property contains asbestos, the asbestos should be in a stable, safe condition. The electrical wiring should be in safe condition. I think there is a case to make that asbestos and electrical wiring should be certified as safe by an independent expert every so often, just as pools are. A property that does not meet minimum standards should not be rented out until it does. If a tenant finds out that the property they are renting doesn't meet minimum standards after they have entered a lease the first step would be to contact the agent/owner. If that doesn't work the tenant should be able to escalate the complaint. The owner should be given the opportunity to rectify the problem within a reasonable amount of time, reasonable time depending on the urgency of the problem. I am not sure what to propose if the owner still isn't cooperative. Giving them a financial penalty isn't going to fix the problem for the tenant, unless the penalty includes an order to fix the problem that can actually be enforced. Regardless, if the problem is dangerous or affecting the tenant's health, the tenant should be allowed to break the lease without penalty and move.
    Hide Replies (2)
    • Angela Ballard about 2 months ago
      The insurance requirements re security reflect minimum standards that should be met.Interestingly, when I asked renters which factor pertaining to security their own experiences reflected most (a purposefully ambiguous question....I did not define security) the factor of least concern was the physical security of the building. This does not mean it is not important, however the other two factors were 'rental conditions' and 'attitudes/behaviours of management'. The correlations were off the charts. So, minimum standards are indeed needed for basic health and safety - intact flooring, safe steps, wiring, gas/plumbing and lockable (and openable) doors and windows, and appliances and fixtures that work and do not cost them money (ie leaky taps ) - but ultimately renters want and need better conditions, treatment and consideration so they can have a stable life without undue interference. Given increasing heat events, electricity and water charges they also need they also need proper airflow, insulation, ceiling fans, and water saving features.Materiality of a place is important also. I have lived in places with 85 year old lino (5 different patterns across adjoining rooms!, and disintegrating carpet that impacted my health...all because owners didn't want tenants to damage the floorboards underneath, in case they sold the place to people who wanted to live there! Yep. So, minimum standards are also about these things also.Actually, I don't want to live with other peoples bad taste in curtains but the fixtures to hang my own are appreciated. And yes....if standards are set but not met, then tenants should be able to break lease with no penalty and the place not be rented until such time as the standards are met. If owners want to come to an arrangement with said to keep the tenants in place while things are fixed then fine...but its time the system was nudged towards professionalism rather than investors not interested in others health and safety.
      Hide reply (1)
      • Sherza about 2 months ago
        Totally agree. I have had to put up worth vertical blinds in so many places now and I hate them. They keep braking chains etc, they rattle like hell if you leave your windows open so you get no sleep. I would much prefer to have the fittings to be able to put up drapes instead. It would also benefit shift workers who need to put up blockout curtains so they are able to sleep during the day
  • Shakes about 2 months ago
    Minimal standards? How so when there is no enforcements? There is no realistic solution here that anybody has offered if these suggestions are remotely sane. This could be repeated in every thread of this rental reform forum. It has to be said, that NO GROUNDS EVICTIONS are commonly used to move Tenants along when they excersize their rights to repairs, and enjoy a rental home in good working order. My partner and I were evicted on no grounds when repairs we were told needed to accumulate before it was viable to pay for a handyman callout. When we breached for failure to make due repairs upon a failed emergency repair, we were moved on at lease-end. Our family of six, with four small Children were close to becoming homeless when we were unable to find a suitable home in good repair. Every home we enter is broken, dirty, and agents make empty promises of having cleaners go over the property before the new Tenants move in. Entry reports are like a book, half of which is Photographic evidence, that tenants have little time to go through whilst moving, and bond cleaning the vacating house, and mark everything the agents missed. Agents use the "where is the supporting documentation?" phrase when old damage was noted by the new tenant upon vacating. Even in reform, there are no serious penalty deterants to protect tenants, and tenants fear to excersize their rights.No mandatory rule, or minimal standard is going to stop the Landlord, and Agent manipulation. This reform is going nowhere. There needs to be stiffer penalties for putting tenants on the street for retaliatory actions if tenants excersize their rights, and a Landlord bond held in trust for such penalties to keep them all honest. If fines are real, tenants are safe to take action to make repairs. This system needs more of a realistic shakeup. For reform as it is will only serve to create more stress upon tenants, as Agents, and Landlords work for themselves with huge loop holes that hurt people. The landlord is the agents financial interest, not the dispensible tenant. There needs to be tougher regulation, and tenant protections before minimal standards are taken seriously.
  • oseyis about 2 months ago
    I'm not very familiar with what legislations are in place in Qld but I image there must be minimum standards currently in place. From our experience renting here for the past 2.5 years there doesn't seem to be any standards that are adhered to by owners and property managers nor does there seem to be any governing body enforcing standards. The first house we rented in Qld (2016) was a renovated Queenslander, the owners had completed the renovations themselves, the scariest issue was the electrical wiring was not to code. There was exposed wiring everywhere under the house (a two story Queenslander with enclosed downstairs), there were also no safety precautions (earth, safety shut off switch) – this was pointed out to us by an electrician who came to install fans. He advised us this was a legal obligation and he would inform the property manager - but no action was ever taken. We were constantly fearful of electrocution – the DIY renovations done by the owner meant many of the windows around the house weren’t installed/sealed properly and when it rained water ran straight inside and over several power points. Several conversations with the property manager simply resulted in them making us feel like ‘bad’ tenants for ‘complaining’.The second property we rented was even more of a nightmare. The area has very low vacancy rates so it was very difficult to secure a rental at this time (2017). We were moving from across state so relied on photographs and a description of the property from the managing agency. The day we arrived at the property – removalist truck in tow – we found it to be in an absolutely decrepit condition. Horrendous was an understatement! There was filth on the walls and carpets inside (brown grime and stains) and the stench was incredibly overwhelming, the back yard was filled with dog faeces and old bones, there was years worth of rubbish and garden debris built up around the house. I actually stood there and cried as we had no choice but to move our belonging into this disgusting mess. We contacted the agency immediately – but they were too busy to come out for a week (they never did come out at all), but they did confirm that (for unknown reasons) they had not done the usual vacate procedures with that property, as such there was no cleaning done, no carpet cleaning, no pest control. To cut a long (horrible) story short it took us two weeks to have all things completed ourselves (at our expense) during which time we had to clean and live in one room (living room). Things also got much worse as we soon realised there were extensive drainage problems with the property which resulted in a constant sewerage smell coming from the showers as well as flooding to the house during rain due to all of the gutters and down pipes being blocked and broken. We spent the next 3 months living in hell and battling with the property managers for help – they treated with dismissive contempt and refused to action any of these issues (saying the owner was unreachable as such they couldn’t approve any actions / or all of our emails had been lost etc). We finally submitted a notice to remedy breach – email lost also. A month later we then moved out and went to court to have the lease ended. Court was a horrible, stressful process as well but we did eventually manage to get free of the situation with a little compensation via a court order – but nowhere near enough to cover our expenses and the terrible stress of these months. Your home is that place where you can go home to and the end of a hard day. It is a place where you should be able to feel safe. Where you should be able to escape the stresses of the world.But in Queensland property managers simply laugh at you when you speak of basic living standards and the provision of a home that is fit to live in – They are absolutely confident they have all the power and there are no repercussions for them if they do not provide tenants with homes that are clean and safe.
    Hide Replies (2)
    • Sanch about 2 months ago
      A terrible terrible story, further reinforcing my decision NEVER to use a Property Manager.Your story is all too familiar in Qld.
      Hide reply (1)
      • oseyis about 2 months ago
        Hi Sanch, very good decision. We previously rented privately for many years prior to these experiences.. without a single issue or negative experience. We have always found all of our owners very caring and we were able to develop really positive relationships - something we have found impossible with property managers. If only more owners would consider this option.
  • Holmes about 2 months ago
    I have never had an issue with the standards of a rental property or getting it maintained, it’s about caring for the property and then building a relationship with the landlord or property manager. Minimum standards should include.Operating and functional bathroom/s All electrical points / lights working and rocker switches workingStairs, steps and doors working. Window catches and door locks all working. Garden maintained and tidy when moving in. Operating oven / stove, including the oven light. All lights in the home must be working.In terms of maintenance we have never had an issue, any maintenance has been attended too promptly and without fuss. Minimum standards are a furfy, most tenants simply don’t understand economics 101, they get what they pay for. If minimum standards are set too high, the cost of rentals will rise and then those on the bottom of the rental chain won’t be able to afford a rental. Set them too high, and landlords will sell up as they see their return diminish. A lot of people bang on about mould, however in almost all cases mould is a result of the way tenants live in a home, not the home itself. It’s things like, airing clothes outside, using an extractor fan when cooking and keeping lids on pots, showering with a window open, and leaving a couple of windows open to ventilate the home every day. This is an area where a landlord can assist, by having security screens on at least three windows and have solid catches on those windows just for ventilation purposes. I have worked in the home comfort and energy efficient areas in a senior strategic role, and this is one of the most Important issue in living in modern air tight homes, with most working and not being home to open and close windows / ventilate the home. Another area is to provide newer renters a list of desires for a rental home such as bedrooms, window catches, ceiling fans, fridge space and so on, then and they rate each item as must have, desirable and not necessary. The list can then be used to asses each rental they view. The one major area where the department can play a MAJOR role between tenants and landlord / agents is education of tenants. Run Education evenings on HOW to look after a rental home, this could lead to a “Living in a rental certificate” for new or younger renters so they know how to look after a home and their rights. Final point, please have a system to actually hold the Feral tenants to account, as those few give us good renters a bad name. It’s far too common for some to get away with trashing a property and then not be held to account. This should include state home tenants, look after the state home or get out!
    Hide Replies (16)
    • Zoroon about 2 months ago
      Yes , I had mould in my kitchen and bathroom, I found by opening windows , the mould was no longer.
    • foxje about 2 months ago
      Great thoughts RE economics 101 - I think you're spot on. With minimum standards the bottom of the market will rise steeply and we'll push people back to living in their cars / caravan parks / short stay accommodation. Then, the government will have to take further action to change this and then we end up with a government run housing system which will end like most government programs - very poorly!!
    • Tammy N about 2 months ago
      What do you do when the mould is not a result of the way you live. I rent a house with a mould problem and I have all the windows open regularly. I noted the mould on the entry report believing it was due to the house being closed up as there was no-one living in it. The real estate asked for photo's which I provided and said they would have something done, but nothing ever was. I have now lived here for two years and am still unable to eliminate the mould. I would move however saving the money for a new bond and advanced rent is difficult and finding another house in my price range is rare,
      Hide Replies (5)
      • Holmes about 2 months ago
        Tammy. As mention d e,sewhere I have a background in the home comfort industry. Mould comes mostly from the way people live in their homes and in reality is far less common in QLD than in Tasmania for example. The other reason for mould is two fold, old mould reoccurring through mould spores than have penetrated the surface, or a water problem. Either is fixable. If there is no water leaks and / or water lying around or damp under the home then it must be drained, this should be a landlords problem unless a tenant has caused it. If it’s mould spores that have penetrated the wall, a wipe over with a mould remover (or bleach/ liquid chlorine or vinegar) twice in one week then weekly for four weeks, plus keeping it well ventilated and dry works wonders. I grew up in a very cold climate in a home where the windows and walls were wet with condensation every morning, but it was kept clean and the walls and windows dried every morning (no breakfast for us kids until we had dried the windows and walls in our bedrooms) to stop any mould forming. Perhaps do a deal with the landlord and offer to try and clean it if he pays for the materials, providing no underlying water problems. NB. Liquid chlorine or bleach should be used with caution and tested on a surface to ensure it doesn’t remove or mark the paint, varnish or covering 😀
        Hide Replies (4)
        • Tammy N about 2 months ago
          I clean regularly with bleach, however the internal doors show signs of swelling. The roof is old and I suspect there is a moisture problem in the roof cavity. I don't know what to do about finding our if my suspicions are correct or what to do about having the problem fixed. The mould is worse in the bathroom as would be expected however I clean this more than once a week and keep the window open and the door open unless showering, there is also an exhaust fan that is used when showering but nothing seems to reduce the mould in there, I just keep cleaning it away. The door on the linen cupboard and bathroom door are both swollen to the point that they are beginning to delaminate. When I mention it to the landlord they just say some things are to be expected in an older home.
        • ChristineA about 2 months ago
          I have heard Oil of Cloves is good for this.
        • Sanch about 2 months ago
          This is good, but bleach will not kill mould spores. Pine products will and are far less toxic than bleach.Bunnings used to sell a product made from Pinebark. It worked amazingly well, both inside and out.I am in Qld. Mould is frequently a problem owing to high humidity. I dont think it is really a Landlord issue. I think it is a case of keep a place well ventilated and dry.
          Hide reply (1)
          • Holmes about 2 months ago
            Believe me, bleach works when applied to a dry surface and regularly, thepine products work very well, but they are not widely stocked. Bleach is available everywhere
    • ChristineA about 2 months ago
      Holmes,Thank you for your balanced submission. Mould is an enormous issue ins Queensland and often good ventilation is all that is needed. Interestingly though, as soon as any spot of mould is noticed, it is immediately the owner's responsibility; read cost. I agree about the "living in a rental property' what a great idea! We have many tenants moving to our area (I am a Property Manager) and one family has burned out three ceramic cooktops during the term of their lease.We have just had some tenants vacate after having a kitten in the property. The stench of cat urine in the carpet is so bad, our Carpet Professional with 20 years experience was reluctant to even open the door of the unit due to the smell. The carpet needs replacing as does the underlay even though it was new just 12 months ago. There is insufficient bond for the additional cleaning required, the replacement of the flyscreens shredded by the same cat and the replacement of the bond. It is not only the additional expense for the owners that should be considered, but the time the process takes. During this time the property is unable to be marketed. Meanwhile the tenant is moving on with their life and disputing us at every turn and demanding two or thee quotes for everything. Having said that - it is one example - we strive to have a relationship with all of our tenants that is based on mutual respect, no matter what level of rent they can afford.
    • Sanch about 2 months ago
      I am an owner, who has throughout life also been a tenant.I agree with all of the things you say here. They are basic common sense and a reasonable way to live.I recently relet my house, making certain that every repair was carried out, everything worked, replaced things ( fans) that were a bit daggy, put in new bathroom lighting, replaced handrails, because the new tenant has a disability, put in grab rails in the bathroom, ensured all exhaust fans were in working order, replaced fly screens with tears etc etc. Because I chiose not to do inspections, thinking them intrusive, I expect if something breaks, that an Adult calls me,as another Adult.I then get things fixed.I supplied topsoil as my new tenant wanted to establish more gardenWear and tear are inevitable.My building, their home.
      Hide Replies (2)
      • Tammy N about 2 months ago
        I would be honoured to rent your house. You sound like you would appreciate someone who is prepared to take care of your house as a home. With a landlord with your attitude it would feel wright making the house a home and you would not feel as if your effort is wasted. We lived in one house that was overgrown and dingy and after cleaning the yard and scrubbing down the outside of the house it looked more welcoming. we then received a notice of intent to increase the rent. needless to say we could no longer afford it and had to move. al that work for someone else's benefit.
        Hide reply (1)
        • Sanch about 2 months ago
          That is beyond outrageous and utterly disgraceful.Everything our Tenant does in the garden, is ultimately an upgrade for our house. Your owners should have been grateful and maybe rewarded you with an offer of some plants for your garden.Disgusting Human Beings.
    • GLTvl about 2 months ago
      You are fortunate enough then to have not had to put up with unscrupulous owners/agents. I was renting a place when a cyclone came through, we were on the edge of the high wind zone so didn't experience the destructive winds. The roof leaked badly and just about every room was wet, including the kitchen and the stove was drenched, plus the ceiling fans all took in water. The agent sent out an electrician as there is a mandatory requirement to have all electrical items checked if they are affected by water. The electrician advised to replace the ceiling fans as they had got enough water in them to start corrosion points that could short out. When he checked the oven he found that the fuse block had been damaged in the past and was bypassed with a piece of fencing wire! He declared it unsafe and said it needed to be replaced. The agent agreed but the owner disputed it, after a while he gave in, but then wanted to replace it with a microwave - a small second hand microwave! He refused to change the fans. In the end he tried to take us to the Tribunal for damaging his roof as we had an astronomical telescope and he said we must have gone up on the roof with it - which we would not, and did not. Thankfully the Tribunal rejected his claim but his roof repairs came down to him getting some relatives to go up and apply silicone to the visible gaps. Do you think we had a chance at rent reduction? In fact, when the lease came up for renewal he wanted a rent increase. As expected, at that time we had somewhere else to go to. "Feral" tenants are held to account, they lose their bond and can be ordered to pay damages. Unfortunately, under the existing rules, greedy landlords have no controls, most people can't even be bothered fighting them. But I'm guessing Holmes that you are a landlord or an agent.
      Hide reply (1)
      • Sanch about 2 months ago
        I read these, and read these and it only serves to further reinforce my reasins for not using agents.I have, as previously stated, been both a Tenant and an Owner, and i think much of it comes down to the way people live, and what their expecations are as Human Beings,Greedy people and those who treat Tenants as scum will always exist, as will Tenants from hell.Those of us in the middle it would seem, are becoming more and more scarce.I dont expect anyone to live in a worse condition , or with worse equipment, than I .I am scupuloulsy clean, bordering on neurotic, but wont have a nervous breakdown if you are not.The Agent with whom I dealt, as perviously stated, tried to go me for Bond and Cleaning, after my last Tenancy, was was forced to recant very quickly when the entry photos, showing a sty, were produced.I will not ever deal with an Agent. The bad ones are way too many, they rarely have the interest of their Tenant at heart. If one rents a place with an oven, one expects an oven.If one rents a place with a Dishwasher, one expects a Dishwasher.Etc etc etc
    • Angela Ballard about 2 months ago
      How about running sessions for investors on how to ensure your property is fit to live in and how to treat renters with respect. Perhaps property managers/owners need training, certification and/or a licence to operate...especially given so many shonky properties and dodgy landlords and agents. Tenants ARE held to account...they lose their bond. whereas owners get away with not ensuring a safe living environment...time and time again.....so shows my PhD research. If investors are accessing tax benefits (minimising their contribution to the public purse) for investing then yes, minimum standards for those paying off the private investment are needed...and given some of the posts here....absolutely necessary, because tenants cannot depend on all property investors to do the right thing.Window catches desirable? yes, if you want to insure your belongings! No words really.... post stands as a very good argument as to why standards are required.
      Hide reply (1)
      • Holmes about 2 months ago
        Oh seem quiet adamant tenants good landlords and agents are bad. As I have said in other comments we have never had an issue with a landlord or an agent. The fact remains there are so many bad tenants and insufficient penalties or law to actually hold them to account. I read in another forum this morning how a tenant who is moving out is trying to stretch carpet together to cover a burn mark in the carpet. A really dodgy tenant trying to get out of their responsibility of fixing the damage they have caused. I favour equal law and penalty fir both tenants and landlords, but without limitation as they can’t afford to pay for the damage they caused. Tenants have it too soft, the bad ones get away without having to be responsible.
  • Lari about 2 months ago
    Minimum standards as per building codes, including fire alarms, vermin control, glass and structural integrity, toxic chemicals and mold removal. All fittings and fixtures should be in good working order and regular maintainence schedules established. Deliberate or excessive damage should be at tenant cost , regular upkeep shared and repair and replacement of fittings such as lights, painting carpets, stoves airconditioners hot water services etc should be covered by owner. The rents are high enough to allow profit from a well thought out purchase plan , it should not be encouraged to purchase a property for rental unless it can be proven that the owner can meet such costs or a substantial deposit required. Owners should be encouraged / compelled to have a sink fund to meet costs or repairs the same way tenants have bond to cover .
    Hide Replies (2)
    • Angela Ballard about 2 months ago
      Yes.....owners should be required to submit a bond (4 weeks...like tenants) to cover cost of urgent repairs - especially toilets, water, electricity, fixed appliances such as stoves and A/C. My research data showed time and time again the delays for even really urgent repairs, retaliatory evictions if tenants dared to access their right and get a toilet repaired. If owners cannot afford such a bond then then shouldn't be in the game...especially as tenants without assets are expected (rightly) to submit a bond as assurance.
      Hide reply (1)
      • Debbie Russell about 2 months ago
        With regards to toilets - the tenant must be aware that if they clog the toilet with toilet paper, kitty litter, sanitary items then the cost for these repairs is the tenants responsibility, Also if the carpet is in good repair when a tenant moves in and it is damaged by the tenant (pet urine, burns, stains) that cannot be removed or repaired then the tenant is responsible for replacing the damaged carpet. The landlord is responsible to ensure that the equipment is working but is not responsible for the items that the tenants put into the toilet. Owners should not be having a bond on their own property as most of the repairs is not wear and tear but tenants not looking after the property in the first place. The rents are not high at the moment but are coming down and most of the rent goes to pay for Rates, Sewerage, Landlord insurance, body corporate fees (if it is a unit) maintenance and mortgage repayments.
  • Jodie1 about 2 months ago
    Minimum standards should be based on funcationality and safety. Properties and its inclusions should be functional and safe. This doesn't mean they need to be new or perfect but they must be fit for purpose. Seems quite simple to me. I think the problem is that the legislation enforceability needs to be more "user friendly". Unfortunately the system to enforce the legislation lets everyone down. It's too hard for anyone to pursue anything that is unfair: eg: not able to hang pictures or tenant not paying water invoices. If is a bad tenant or bad landlord, its too hard make them do the right thing. The right thing already exists in the legislation, but making the tenant/landlord do it, is a major feat, a ridiculously long process and a gamble at best. RTA resolution service is of no help and they are inconsistent.
    Hide Replies (2)
    • Dianne Mendoza about 2 months ago
      Totally agree. If the Residential Tenancies Aurhority were more thorough and asked pertinent questions from tenants their would be less lengthy and costly visits to QCAT.
    • Angela Ballard about 2 months ago
      Yep...the redress system is way too onerous on tenants....REAs and owners are in business...therefore more acclimatised to the system. The RTA do their best but if one proprietary party is belligerent then off it goes to QCAT. Many unscrupulous managers depend on tenants not taking up the onerous fight...too hard, too time consuming and stressful.
  • CNielsen about 2 months ago
    The property I am in now, the agent rented the property since the property was built 25 years ago. The condition report the agent gave me showed things like the stove as New Condition.. The stove had to be replaced as it had rusted out. Yet the condition report has never been updated for things in 25 years, Curtains New? Carpet as New? Not now, they're nearly worn out yet the condition reports show them as New..
    Hide Replies (5)
    • Bronnie about 2 months ago
      I agree property reports should be renewed at least every 5 years, also photos updated! Don't show tenants photos taken when the property was renovated or on the market 25 years ago, they need to be updated regularly !
      Hide reply (1)
      • Angela Ballard about 2 months ago
        Probable needs to be more regular than that. A lot can deteriorate in all kinds of conditions over five years.
    • Michelle2018 about 2 months ago
      At a certain age all appliances fail and need replacing. Rust on cooktops is due to occupants not cleaning to an acceptable standard. Perhaps the question should be, ‘ Should a tenant cause a previously well maintained appliance to fall in to a condition that is not fit for use due to inadequate care be required to replace that appliance.”
    • DebbieP about 2 months ago
      That's very lazy Property Management and Entry Reports and photos should be updated at the change of every tenancy not set to a timeframe.
    • Sanch about 2 months ago
      This is simply disgraceful.
  • Charlie1908 about 2 months ago
    I think that minimum standards are to be applauded. I think that everyone is entitled to live in safe and secure conditions, without fear of eviction.I also believe that landlords - who are largely "mum and dad" investors trying to put something by for their retirement are entitled to a fair return for their investment - so do we also consider minimum rentals for complying safe and secure premises?
  • TSQLD about 2 months ago
    A minimum standard of safety should be required for a rental property including fixtures, fittings and equipment functionality; electrical and plumbing functionality; garden and landscaping upkeep; security of premises; and the absence of biological hazards such as mould. A minimum standard on these items would ensure renters feel secure in their rental. This is important as it relates to a persons safety. With regard to the appearance conditions, this is less important as these factors can be determined by the applicant as as necessary item or not. In saying this however, I do feel that there needs to be a significant legislative overall in the transparency of a properties safety, as well as upkeep and appearance during advertisement. As the rental market increases in competition, it is becoming increasingly difficult to perform a property inspection prior to applying to rent, particularly in major cities. I have had experiences where I have felt pressured by Property Agents to "apply for the property now as it will be gone by the scheduled inspection time". With this increasing competition it must be standardised that Agents advertise with: - detailed lists of safety standards- maintenance issues and upkeep requirements - current (within 3 months) DETAILED photos of a properties interior and exterior. Renters should be able to feel like they have a clear picture of a properties safety standards, condition and upkeep requirements from the advertisement. They can then choose to wait for a property inspection or apply straight away.
  • Evan Cordingley about 2 months ago
    Removed by moderator.
  • cdzn about 2 months ago
    In North Queensland, fly screens should be required. Properties should be fully airconditioned unless it can be demonstrated that the architectural design keeps the house cool. There should be a minimum standard for kitchens: fully functional stove/oven, minimum standard of bench space and cupboard space in keeping with the size of the property (eg. studio apartments may have less bench space, but a 3 bedroom house should have enough bench space to be practical for a family).If some minimum standards are not met, the property should not be eligible for rental without official exemption.Some minimum standard of condition and function is important because as long as tenants cannot make alterations themselves, some landlords will take advantage of a tight rental market to rent properties which are practically unlivable because potential tenants have little choice but to take what they can afford or is available to rent.
    Hide Replies (3)
    • Rodger about 2 months ago
      If the standards don't suit you then don't rent it. More regulation results in higher costs and therefore more homeless
    • winnie4506 about 2 months ago
      You will have even less properties to choose from if properties become a financial burden to investors. If this were to happen I would either a) sell or b) put the rent up to cover the costs.
    • Michelle2018 about 2 months ago
      This is not practical. Furthermore no one forces a tenant to rent a property. If you do not like the kitchen space do not rent. If a property has no air conditioning and a prospective tenant is looking for this then rent an air conditioned property. Same with screens. I imagine that it is more expensive to rent a house with all the amenities you are seeking.
  • Michelle2018 about 2 months ago
    A property must meet minimum standards prior to house being let. Tenants then share the responsibility to keep a property in good order by cleaning it properly to avoid damage to goods, such as stove tops, airconditioners, ovens and so on. The same with swimming pools, tenants should prove they are looking after the pool and its equipment regularly to ensure damage does not arise from neglect. Tenants should have air conditioners serviced regularly and same for smoke alarms. At the moment air conditioners are simply left until they break, and the owner must pay for annual review of smoke alarms.
  • Sapphy about 2 months ago
    I rented an old house with 4 flats. I wasnt given a lot of time to look as the young woman was pregnant and it was a very hot day and she wanted to leave. I noticed the mold on the ceiling of the bathroom and was told it had just been freshly painted and the paint has not stuck. I told her I thought it was black mold. She said no it wasn't. I ended up renting it as at the time it was all that I could afford and was available. I got sick within the first month and got steadily worse as the months rolled by. Then the landlord moved in a young woman who started holding drug parties. I was then in a really bad way and the landlord told me basically ..tough. I had to get legal help to get out of the lease. I was in hospital 11 times in 3 months I was that sick. Land lord said.. you've got to expect this in an old house. Sadly there is a young guy now renting the flat and he has been told of the mold etc and he should get out.. sadly hes in the same boat I was in as he cant afford anything else. The rent was $230 a week and now my lungs are in a really bad way.
  • Michelle2018 about 2 months ago
    Acceptable standards include, smoke alarms, pool safety, and buildings that are in good repair so has to be fit for habitation. I believe that such standards are in place now.
  • Rard Chanmgizi about 2 months ago
    Unfortunately this subject is very much based on a person's definition of "acceptable standard". Under existing legislation for Real Estate agents in property management any rental property must achieve a level of safety in electrical compliance, pool safety compliance and smoke alarm compliance. Maintaining these costs and standard is an expectation on landlords. There is also legislation in place that uses the words livable and habitable. There is however no definition to these words.The issues that arise as pointed out by many of the respondents, arise when a property is self managed by the landlord. Issues of condition and standards are rarely encountered where there is a managing agent is involved because they have an obligation under the legislation under which they operate to ensure that properties they manage achieve certain standards. If all private landlords were forced to become licenced and had to comply with existing legislation, I think that many of the issues would disappear. If a property does not achieve the standards that managing agents are supposed to provide in a property for a tenancy, then the property should not be allowed to be rented.If the industry was to tighten regulation by tightening requirements on the standard and condition of properties, this would lead to increases in rent, a further tightening of the rental market, less people buying properties as rental investments and an increase in pressure on public housing. Would it not be better to legislate that all rental properties must be managed by registered and licenced rental agents?
    Hide reply (1)
    • Bronnie about 2 months ago
      I agree with Rard regarding having property managers. As a 1st time landlord I was unaware at the onset of the requirements of rental. We had engaged a real estate to manage, so before our property could be let there were a few minor things that needed to be rectified for compliance. Having a registered property management agent to attend the property of self managed landlords to issue a compliance certificate,( as with pool fencing compliance) I think would be beneficial to both parties. This would keep the landlords who are not aware, up to date with issues, but also, those landlords who just DON'T care would have to rectify or the property removed from the rental market until it complies.
  • Ono about 2 months ago
    I would like the option in the poll to reply 'all of the above' rather than only having the option to choose 1. Mandatory time frames for repairs, a repairs bond and minimum standards are all good ideas.
  • Nivannii about 2 months ago
    As previously stated in other discussions, I live in a house that has five bedrooms downstairs. The owner lives upstairs in a recently built 2 bedroom self contained unit. She also rents out one bedroom upstairs. She rents the rooms out separately.Her clean and the standards she accepts here (as well as the other tenants) are no where near my clean. I expect clean windows and screens - she sees this as 5 star and her place isn't that. I expect the house to be cleaned at least on a fortnightly roster depending on use. No ... just let the tenants clean when they want to. (The cleaner I insisted she get in when I first moved here finished six weeks ago. I am the only one that has done any cleaning since. I'm grateful I have my own en-suite and kitchen stuff) She asked me to do up a roster which I did. She hasn't mentioned it since I emailed it to her 6 weeks ago.So what is clean?? My standards are that I MAKE something clean and then I maintain that standard ... especially in a 'public' house like this. Needless to say I have let the landlady know I'm looking for other accommodation. I have two very small dogs so this isn't as easy as it sounds - reason why I've stayed this long however the landlady said I didn't have to wait out the whole 3 months that I signed on as minimum. That's the way to do it ... let the only person who cares go and watch your investment fall down around your ears.Minimum standards would be wonderful - how to 'police' this is another question though. Most of us put up with lower standards as it's the only rent we can afford.
  • Evelynne about 2 months ago
    Acceptable standards should address safety and health. Rental properties and in particular properties built prior to 1980 should be brought up to contemporary building and safety standards.regarding insulation against fire, climate and neighbour noise. Many older properties do not meet todays adequate and acceptable living standards. Properties that do not meet such standards should not pass as acceptable for rental accommodation. Minimum standards for safety and health would benefit tenant, owner and manager, the safety and health of tenants, the safety of the owners investment and the professional reputation of the property manager.
    Hide reply (1)
    • PeteM about 2 months ago
      Fully agree but who will pay for the inspections that will certify the property complies? Ultimately the tenant. 99% of property managers are interested only in getting the property rented and banking the commission received. Currently they won't do a safety inspection a property prior to signing up the owner. Remember property managers teat tenants as the enemy.
  • PeteM about 2 months ago
    We live in a small hopme on the Fraser Coast which is very old and in a poor state of repair. There aren't any insect screens (it would be very expensive to instal them too). Rental properties that we can only just afford in this area all show similar poor condition. A recent blocked toilet that took 40 hours to fix (from report time) was explained by the plumber as the result of tree roots through the very old pipes and that we can epect this problem to regularly occur particularly if the dry continues. No good complaining as any alternative properties will have simila problems.
  • Von about 2 months ago
    We moved into a new townhouse and the warranty repairs meant that we had tradesmen coming into the property weekly to fix warranty issues. We were used to identify issues and make lists for the agent and to liaise with the tradesmen and report back to the Agent. This took up a lot of time and interfered with our "Quiet enjoyment of the property" that we were renting. So issues are not just with older properties but new ones too. The fact that tradesmen are given a key to enter to perform repairs without anyone present is also an issue. The Agent would not attend if we were at home for the repair and we were often acting as the Agent ensuring that the repairs were done correctly. There were also occasions when the tradesmen were not up to speed on what exactly needed to be fixed and we had to advise. Would owners let tradesmen have a key to enter their home to fix issues without anyone being on site? I don't think so!!
  • Simba about 2 months ago
    Of course the properties should be tidy and be safe for tenants to stay in. On the other hand, the tenant has a duty of care to inform the real estate or owner when they damage stuff and as well make good what they have damaged so that the property is kept to a minimum standard.
  • Elle about 2 months ago
    In relation to good living standards RTA form availability seems to work for tenants and lessors. If unsuccessful either party can take further and tenant can move to more suitable accommodation.Tenants should pay for damages made if property standards initially met, by mandatory process.Lessors should provide a safe clean and comfortable standard at all times. Tenants do have a choice and I am fortunate and experienced enough to rent property suitable.
  • fnaoirtmhan about 2 months ago
    What should happen if minimum standards are not met?-currently I'm renting at $595 per week & 9 weeks in advance.-en-suite leaking threw wall into hall way, carpet turned black from mold, going on 20 months now and still not fixed. my 3 year old ( severe ASD autism) ate/liked the carpet and was hospitalized from pooing blood.) i did not know this was the casue until i have started the procedure of the act and involving the RTA.- hot water system blew. the plumber who replaced it told me the system was not earthed and that why me and my four toddlers were getting zapped when touching taps shower heads & water. -all house pipes backed up & come into the house from grey water pump braking and tank filled up.- grease trap over flowed into the grey water tank. the grease trap had not been emptied in over 7 years, the grey water pump was replaced 3 months before i moved in and the owners were told to get grease trap emptied as it is the reason of problem.- pool pipes cracked & loses 250L per day at a minimum when run, the entire lease going on 20 months, the owners were told of the leaks and massive issues with the pool but did not tell me as a new tenant.- paying full water rates when the house and pool has leaks, last bill was $760 for a quarter, even though the owners knew of water leaking problems.-pool pump stopped working 6 weeks ago, & im being blamed for breaking it becasue the pool is thick green and homing mosquitoes. (i have photos of the day it was reported and everyday since & it shows the pool crystal clear going to green and then the state it is now but im still getting the blame)-air con stopped working 3 weeks ago. - text, calls, emails, and in person Lessor threatening me and abusing me.- council has told me i will get the fines for the pool being green and not the owner even though i have shown solid proof. i will have to take it to QCAT to sue owner to pay for fine.so all of the above and no rent reduction in place & no compensation.RTA has been involved and they can not do any more.QSTARTS is some help but not much.i have found no matter what the Lessor/owner does, the law is on their side.now have to go to QCAT to get anything done. and even then i have been told i will be asked why i have not left or done anything until now.and because i have not left i will lose the case.this is not fair or right.so what should happen if the minimum standards are not met? the owners/lessor & or the agent should have fear in them of breaking the act/law , just like tenants do now.I have never had a bad name on my rental history, i did not know what RTA,QSTARTS,QCAT were until now, and i now fear leaving hear and renting another property as i now know tenants DO NOT HAVE RIGHTS.
  • Veritas about 2 months ago
    Investors can make money from rental properties and still be decent landlords; it is not automatic though. Two maintenance related comments: (1) It is reasonable to expect that maintenance is addressed in a prioritised fashion and without acceptable time frames. I would include corrective actions as maintenance; e.g. ensuring all external doors are safe. That doesn’t always happen. (2) The ambiguities around responsibilities for maintaining complex gardens should be cleared up. Hedges for example. Anything that requires working at height and use of specialist tools should be the owner’s responsibility.
  • Jojoi about 2 months ago
    Clean, safe, any sort of health issue fixed immediately. Fixed within two weeks or landlord faces some sort penalty, maybe a 3 strikes and you incur a financial penalty.Property should be repaired to standard of when tenants moved inIt may cost landlords more money to maintain but you shouldn't be a landlord if you don't have back up money. Act as if it's your mother living there. How would you want her to live
  • Chmiroau about 2 months ago
    Investment properties are being run as a wealth creation scheme for most investors. Because of this they are not investing in the property simply to provide people with somewhere to live. The people renting the property are often seen as the way they can mitigate the cost of owning an investment property and as such they run their property ownership like a business and like a business their expenses are tax deductible. You cannot run a hire car business without very tight regulation on the condition of the rental car, at least it must have a yearly road safety certificate and it also must have regular maintenance. At least one of these is government regulated, the safety certificate.Currently there is no such regulatory inspections to ascertain the livability of the property being offered for rent and virtually no regular maintenance is being done by the landlords.Case in point. Our last rental had several issues. The rainwater pump failed and wasn't replaced, the dishwasher failed and wasn't replaced, the hot water service failed and while it was replaced, it was originally a heat pump service ad and such was connected to the day rate electricity supply, it was replaced with the cheapest most inefficient hot water service, one that is designed to be on night rate electricity, however to save cost it was fitted to the existing day rate. Our electricity bills skyrocketed. The agent and landlord labeled us as serial complainers and it took six months fighting through QCAT to get compensation.Investment in housing IS a business and as such certain levels of quality need to be put in place. Maximum rental rate also needs to be applied as some properties are renting for way higher than the average simply because the landlord is prepared to accept some damage to the property, or the property is already in decline and the accepted tenants cannot find any other rental.
  • Cassandra11 about 2 months ago
    Rental properties should all have safe stairways and verandahs, balconies and railings should all be fit for purpose and windows should be fitted with insect screens and, if necessary, safety screens. ALL doors should have Crimsafe doors, and ALL locks should be changed for each new tenant. Stoves should be in good working order and hot water systems likewise. Fans and a.c. units should be working, and it should be undertaken that they be replaced if they fail during the tenancy. No landlord should be able to refuse to carry out repairs to ensure tenants' safety, nor refuse to repair or replace anything that was originally advertised as being part of the rental at the beginning of the tenancy.
    Hide Replies (2)
    • D.K about 2 months ago
      Crimsafe doors, I cannot even afford them for my own home. The tenant gets the same as me a "normal" triple lock screen door. Do you realise just how much it costs to get a locksmith to change all the locks? Otherwise I agree things that are advertised as working should work or be repaired in good time.
    • GLTvl about 2 months ago
      Overall I agree Cassandra, but perhaps Crimsafe doors are a bit of a stretch, as that would mean security grills on windows etc, which can be a burdon on the owner. I have owned a rental property, which was losing money because property values plummeted and I had to lower the rent in line with rental standards (the rule of thumb is the rent per week is 10% of the market value of the property value). That rule is not always followed, unfortunately, but is there because when the property market is depressed the economy is usually in trouble as well, meaning the cost of living is higher. The bottom line of that is that the renter will be finding it harder to pay the rent. In our case the property value dropped from $375,000 to $300,000, our tenants (elderly self funded retirees) were feeling the pinch and so, to be fair we dropped the rent as far as we could, down to $300 per week. Remember we were trying to pay a bank loan for the property, so we had to get something, but that rent left us short $1000 per month on our repayments. The property had good security doors and grills in place, but if it didn't and we were expected to pay for installation we would have been unable to do it.
  • GLTvl about 2 months ago
    It appears that cheap rental in Queensland correlates with poorly maintained and often substandard dwellings. During the time I have rented this has been clearly evident, if I can pay for an expensive rental, such as a new or near new house, in the $400-$500 per week range, the I can expect to receive prompt servicing for repairs and there is generally a reasonable approach to expectations by the property owner or manager. Conversely, if the property is at the lower end of the market it is more often than not flawed and substandard. I have had both experiences, and I hear all too often the same from other people who rent. My daughter has just left a rental which was clearly unsafe. It had faulty power and light switches, plumbing leaks, cockroaches living in the walls and a stove that worked intermittently. But, being a single parent, she couldn't afford better at that time. Of course people ask "Why rent such a dive anyway?" but the reality is that, when you're barely getting by you often don't have the luxury of choice, and when you have nowhere to live a roof over your head at any cost leaves little choice. Besides which, at the bottom end of the market all the properties are the same, and the landlords only care about making money. I believe they, and they and their agents treat tenants with contempt - I've overheard an agent describe tenants as "scum". The market needs strong regulation based on safety and hygiene. Of course there needs to be lower end housing, otherwise we'd have families on the street, but there is no reason for the properties to be unsafe death traps. We have seen the backpacker accommodation regulated and standards raised, but only in response to tragic multiple loss of life. Please don't let the same lessons have to be learned before basic tenancy standards are mandated.
  • Shell75 about 2 months ago
    A minimum standards would be a great idea. Safety of the tenant and property should be the high priority. Properties should be safe for adults and especially children. Exposed electrical wires are not safe and the real estate does nothing. Not good. Unsafe railings and wobble when you hold them walking down stairs. Not good at all. I can;t have my elderly family come over as it is not safe for them to get into the house.
  • Snakes Creek about 2 months ago
    . If there is a minimum standard on condition there will also need to be a minimum base rent required as well. Consider the flow on effect ???????If the rent in an area is too low to maintain a property to a set standard the property will be removed from the rental market. Therefor less properties available to rent, resulting in an increase in the over all rental market. The problem is the damage durning the 1 to 2 years while the market adjusts. Rental prices will increase due to supply and demand. Recently I have tennents that locked a dog in the house. The damage for materials alone was over $2000 plus 10 days of my unpaid work. ( tennents in jail, no chance of paying)
  • 02 Rent about 2 months ago
    The property must be safe and repairs done to Australian standards. The property must be deemed safe to live in. Who determines if the standard of repair is not safe or the minimum standard is met, definitely not the property manager, tenant or lessor. The tradie must provide a standard and acknowledgement the work is done to the require standard.
  • Pandora about 2 months ago
    My first thought is BEDROOM SIZE. The rental value of a house has a lot to do with how many bedrooms the house has. Often tiny rooms are passed off as bedrooms. In an un-airconditioned house bedrooms should have an opening window. This is vital in the Queensland climate. It's important that in rentals EVERYTHING WORKS. That means all windows and doors should open and lock, all windows should have glass, all power sockets work. All electrics and plumbing should work, be safe and meet specifications.Everything should be SAFE, for example: stair and veranda rails should meet government specifications. Properties should be clean and free from rubbish. At the lower end of the housing market these things often aren't the case, believe me.
    Hide reply (1)
    • ChristineA about 2 months ago
      Are there Government specifications relative to what you mention above?
  • bridey about 2 months ago
    I think there should be minimum standards for safety i.e. electrical, flooring, roofing etc. but 'condition' can be variable dependent on circumstances of both parties and should be left to market forces. Some people would be happy to let a place that is safe but rundown in exchange for a weekly rent they can afford. Setting minimum standards could result in increased costs to the landlord who would either decide providing a rental property is not viable, or be forced to increase the rent to cover the expense outlaid, thus making accommodation unaffordable for the tenant.
  • ColinH about 2 months ago
    All appliances and equipment should be tested and working, We just moved into a rental and two of the four air-con units do not work, Now awaiting the owner to give permission for them to be repaired.
  • hsr about 2 months ago
    There should be minimum safety standards before landlords are allowed to rent out their property. Some houses are in disgusting condition and that draws the market into disrepute. No-one should hhave to live in those conditions. Also, there should be mandatory requirements for repairs, e.g. time taken, and a bond for the repair bill (ie the landlord pays a bond to the agent). I know it's hard as a landlord sometimes to repair lots of things, we have recently had to replace gutters, bathroom lights etc, but the alternative is a rundown, broken down house.