Have your say - Renting in QLD

The renting reforms appear to be about making things better for renters (surveys tend to favour the renters and look at issues from a renter's perspective), without taking into consideration the rights of the owners of the properties who are, in many cases, just working class people who are trying to set themselves up for, hopefully, a brighter future. The landlords often have large loans (sometimes with mortgages over their own homes), work hard and do without other things so that they can service the loans whilst providing a home for someone else. Whilst negative gearing provides some assistance financially, there is often still a shortfall that has to be made up by the landlord. I believe that it should be a landlord's right to choose who rents their property. If things go wrong, it is the landlord (or their agent) who has to deal with issues. We do not allow pets (cats or dogs) in our rental property (or in our own home) because, no matter how careful or clean a tenant is, there will always be some deterioration of the property due to the pets (pet hair, smell, garden damage). Bond is only 4 weeks rent which would not go near the cost of replacing all the carpets, for example. With the large financial cost of owning the property, we cannot also afford to have anything de-value it or add to our costs. The suggestion that all rental properties should be made to have strict minimum standards including air-conditioning is unreasonable (many of us grew up without air-conditioning and still survived!). I believe that this would just increase the cost of rents substantially as, particularly in older buildings this could be difficult and expensive to install, and the landlord would have to raise the rent to cover the cost. If a prospective tenant looks at a property and it doesn't have the amenities they want (eg air-cons, energy efficient appliances), then they have the choice to look for a property that suits their preferences. With regard to the ending of a rental lease, I believe that the landlord should have the right to end the tenancy without grounds as long as they give the tenant the required 2 months' notice (why should we have to explain our situation to the tenant?). Circumstances change and as it is the landlord who owns the property and ultimately has the financial commitments, this should be their right. I believe that the tenant only has to give the landlord 2 weeks' notice if they wish to leave which is unfair and can leave a landlord struggling to make loan repayments if new tenants can't be found quickly. To be fair to both parties, maybe a tenant should be required to give 2 months' notice to leave as well. There are good and bad tenants and landlords and I think that the current rules in place are sufficient to offer some protection to both parties. The more difficult it becomes for people to own a rental property, due to tougher rules, less negative gearing assistance, more capital gains tax on sale etc., the less rental properties there will be available which may lead to higher rents and more competition between renters. Perhaps changes may lead to more people being able to purchase their own home, however, there will still be many who will need to rent for various reasons and higher rents would make this more difficult.

When a tenant informs an agent of repairs that need to be done, there should be a minimum time for them to be done, or the tenant should be able to breach the agent if not done.
The property should be thoroughly inspected every 3 months at the beginning of a lease, and 6 months thereafter, and if there is an issue, this should be fixed immediately.
The entry report should be thorough, with photographs, and any issues the incoming tenant sees dealt with immediately.
Agents should not be able to evict a tenant with no reason....and the landlord should be involved in the decision. Agents should not be able to evict a tenant after six months so they can increase the rent above the standard, and/or get another finders fee for finding a new tenant.
Agents should do thorough checks ....police, references, etc., and submit results to the landlord before accepting a tenant. Some agents are putting tenants into properties within an hour or so of them applying, and then wonder why the house is wrecked.
Rents should not be increased by unacceptable amounts.

There needs to be firm regulations in place so landlords can't increase their rents unfairly to take advantage of times like post-cyclone because there are more tradies in the area - ie. putting up rent from $275 to $340/wk. Increase due to insurance is understandable but huge jumps, no. Especially when the renters have been long term with a good record. It's extremely unfair and puts strain on people who are already having a hard time after the cyclone.

Needs to be strict minimum standards for all rental properties including the following:
1. Air-conditioning of a modern and energy efficient standard. It is totally unacceptable for some properties to still be without it.
2. Adequate ventilation of bathrooms and kitchens using extractor fans.
3. Roofs must be kept in good repair, free of rust and damage that could cause water to enter a property.
4. Rental properties should be fitted with smart meters so occupants can accurately measure and manage their energy usage.
5. Minimum times for repairs must be set and high penalties incurred for failure to act.

There needs to be more regulations in the real estate industry to stop landlords and agents taking advantage of renters. These are some of the most vulnerable people in our society. Especially after the cyclone there was a lot of renters under stress. Our landlord refused to do anything about bad mould after the cyclone, we lived in a mouldy house for over 10 months. The only thing renters can do is to take it to QCAT which is stressful and costly. There needs to be a regulatory body to monitor agents and landlord to ensure they act fairly