Tenant Requested Repairs - Tenant User Error - Rental Agency Now Requesting I Pay Callout Fee

DaneD on 23/01/2020 - 16:23
Last edited 23/01/2020 - 22:37

Hi Team,

Essentially issue mirrors the title (I'm in QLD).

A new tenant moved in and was having issues with a buzzing sound coming through the intercom & requested repair through my rental agency. I agreed (makes sense to repair things that are broken) and asked my rental agency to organise repairs. I have been using the same rental agency for ~6 years.

Intercom company visited the property & found the tenant simply left the mute button on hence the buzzing. The rental agency contacted the tenant & request they pay the invoice since it was simply a user error. However, the tenant is refusing to pay as no user manual was provided (there is legitimately 2 buttons on the intercom talk and mute). The rental agent has since requested I pay the invoice instead ~$200.

I am of the opinion it is reasonable to expect that the tenant would attempt to have a look, listen and even press both buttons before requesting a repair. Furthermore, I find it pretty rough I am now being asked to pay the invoice. However, I am not keen on going through an RTA disagreement resolution process over this amount of money.

TLDR - Tenant request repairs to intercom, user error was found, tenant refusing to pay callout fee ~$200, rental agency is asking I pay.

Thoughts?

Update - Thanks for swift replies team. I will pay the bill, tell rental agency to be more proactive in the future & don't hire guys with ~$200 callout fee. Thanks :).

Resolved feel free to close.

Poll Options expired

  • 5
    Pay half myself & half from the rental agency
  • 12
    Pay half myself & half from the tenant
  • 14
    Ask the rental agency to pay the invoice as I am not at fault & tenant said no
  • 131
    Request the tenant pays again & go through RTA if they refuse.
  • 168
    Pay the callout fee myself.
Financial

closed Comments

  • [Deactivated] on 23/01/2020 - 16:38
    +13

    Pay the fee.

    Do not renew lease.

    • wiipantz on 23/01/2020 - 16:56
      +28

      It's the agency ultimately at fault. Partially on the owner for no provision of instruction and lazy agents not providing any service to either customer. Yet you blame the tenant, classic punching down in place.

      • [Deactivated] on 23/01/2020 - 17:09
        +8

        Pay the fee.

        Not sure if you read that part of the long comment.

        One can accept liability and still be disatisfied with the tenant. I'm just going of OP's report that there are two buttons.

        If the tenant locks themselves out of the building because they are not familiar with a door set, are we still going to carry the same standards of calling everything "punching down" when we operate on the presumption the tenant is a dolt?

        • abb on 23/01/2020 - 17:19
          +16

          If the tenant locks themselves out of the building

          The agent should have spare keys on hand to loan to the tenant, resolving the issue at no charge to anyone. If the tenant loses the spare set, sure, pay up.

          In OP's case, the agent should have done some troubleshooting by phone/email - is the handset on the hook, what happens when you press the buttons. The only problem is that half the rental agents I've met (far too many!) would not be able to defeat a below-average border collie in a battle of wits.

          (also, kicking the tenant out may well cost more than $200 in lost rent)

          • [Deactivated] on 23/01/2020 - 18:00

            @abb: Not kicking out. Exercising the option to not renew.

            • abb on 23/01/2020 - 18:15
              -1

              @[Deactivated]: potayto potahto

              • HardlyCharly on 23/01/2020 - 19:21
                -6

                @abb: No, completely different things, can people still do high school english courses at tafe or online? That would be a good option for you…

      • brendanm on 23/01/2020 - 17:20
        +20

        The tenant was too stupid to try pressing 2 buttons. They deserve to pay the fee, call it a stupid tax.

        • garetz on 23/01/2020 - 17:26
          +2

          on the flipside, the owner was too stupid to come out and press those 2 buttons as well, and asked the rea to send out someone to check it out, cause they either didnt want to waste their own time, or didnt think things through.

          Before oking something like that i would at least have a look myself if i was the owner.

          • brendanm on 23/01/2020 - 17:28
            +18

            @garetz: How do you know the owner is even nearby, let alone in the same state? It's 2 buttons. Press then and find out happens. Also, the owner pays the rea so that they don't have to deal with this kind of stupidity, they obviously font want to self manage, and obviously don't want to go to see some goose about an intercom.

              • brendanm on 23/01/2020 - 17:33
                +7

                @garetz: Of course they would ok the repair, they assumed the tenant would have the common sense to actually press the buttons. As the tenant has been the cause for the call out, they should pay, or the rea for not managing the property effectively. I sure wouldn't be renewing the lease.

                • garetz on 23/01/2020 - 17:37
                  +2

                  @brendanm: common sense is not often common, assuming anything as a rea is basically failing their responsibility at their job, now that the owner knows the rea is negligent, they can choose to find a new rea who will actually do their job.

                  The tennant said there was a humm, they never claimed what was causing it, a simple visit by the rea would of saved the owner $200, it comes down to who is doing their job and who isnt doing it.

                  • DaneD on 23/01/2020 - 17:48
                    +6

                    @garetz: Brendanm is right - the tenant was complaining about the buzzing/humming sound otherwise they would not have requested a repair. A tenant does not generally 'claim' what is causing something they indicate there is an issue eg. the a/c is not working it won't turn on (you would fairly assume they have attempted to use the remote). Anyway, garetz you are also right - the agency should of been diligent and checked.

                    So lets all relax :)

                    • garetz on 23/01/2020 - 17:48

                      @DaneD: stupidity isnt the same as responsibility, conflating them both is the problem here.

                      • [Deactivated] on 23/01/2020 - 18:02
                        +3

                        @garetz: Responsibility lies with the landlord hence why I said the landlord should just pay up.

                        When it comes time to reconsider the lease, try finding a less stupid tenant.

                        • garetz on 23/01/2020 - 18:08
                          -6

                          @[Deactivated]: Are you saying you should do an iq test as part of the tenant agreement ? Stupid people deserve to be able to rent places too, sounds like a slippery slope you are proposing.

                          You cannot account for stupidity but you can minimise its impact by not being stupid yourself or hiring a stupid rea.

                          This was a series of stupidity, the owner was stupid for oking it without asking the rea to do their job, the rea was stupid for assuming the tenant had an idea how the intercom worked, and the tenant was stupid for not doing basic checks.

                          If you really want to use stupidity as a basis for anything then the owner should sell up and stop renting their place, obviously too stupid to keep ownership, the rea should be fired for being too stupid or lazy to do their job, but what can the tenant do, they still need a place to live.

                          • brendanm on 23/01/2020 - 19:19
                            +8

                            @garetz: Stupid people who cost me money, and are proven to do stupid things that cost money, would not be renting my house.

                            • Ti-au on 26/01/2020 - 17:24

                              @brendanm: well they could be renting your house, because you don't know if they are stupid before you rent to them.

                        • Chandler on 24/01/2020 - 11:24
                          +1

                          @[Deactivated]:

                          try finding a less stupid tenant

                          Or a more useful REA.

            • abb on 23/01/2020 - 18:21
              -1

              @brendanm:

              It's 2 buttons. Press then and find out happens.

              Tenant held both buttons for 5 seconds, overloaded the power supply, and the intercom caught fire. Who should pay for new intercom?

              This is not by any stretch a likely outcome, but a lot of people are scared of things they don't understand because they fear bad consequences. See: most elderly people and computers.

              • brendanm on 23/01/2020 - 19:18

                @abb: It's a two button intercom. People that can't think enough to attempt to troubleshoot something, more than likely don't have the forward thinking to imagine any of the possible consequences.

          • Slippery Fish on 24/01/2020 - 18:01
            +1

            @garetz: He's paying the rea I'd be livid they didn't expect it.

        • ozbjunkie on 25/01/2020 - 06:03

          Also didn't just call for assistance - "how do I use the intercom?"… rather than claiming it's broken.

      • HighAndDry on 24/01/2020 - 02:32
        +1

        Yet you blame the tenant, classic punching down in place.

        Nothing wrong when the tenant can't operate a simple two button intercom and reports a fault when there wasn't one.

        Standard that the tenant pays in this situation.

        • wiipantz on 24/01/2020 - 08:46
          +4

          However in reality if a tenant were to try and fix something without instruction or direction they would liable if something goes wrong. They contact the agents who were lazy and tshow seems to justify. The tenant did the right thing in contacting the agent, stupid or not for not knowing how to fix something is irrelevant the agent should be both there to help in these situations at least with some instruction. The vast majority of times if the tenant tries to intervene it could cause further cost and onus on them. Further more punching down with a narrow view, seems very telling of both your characters. The real maneuver is to get a more credible agent it appears… I don't envy that task.

          • HighAndDry on 24/01/2020 - 08:47
            +1

            @wiipantz: They didn't need to fix anything, just confirm that there actually is a defect before reporting that there's a defect.

            • wiipantz on 24/01/2020 - 08:47
              +2

              @HighAndDry: Correct and the agent failed.

              • HighAndDry on 24/01/2020 - 08:48
                -3

                @wiipantz: The agent isn't an engineer or technical specialist. There's nothing they can do that the tenant can't - and the tenant is the one who lives there and is best placed to confirm the defect, and the one who made the erroneous report of a defect.

                Is the tenant a toddler or otherwise mentally disabled?

                • wiipantz on 24/01/2020 - 08:50
                  +3

                  @HighAndDry: Thats not their job, the tenant reported the defect the agent decides on behalf of owner how to respond. It's quite simple you would expect a good tenant to report things to the RE. The agents apathy caused the call out without doing their due diligence. Pay the fee as some lessor minds would say

                  • HighAndDry on 24/01/2020 - 08:51
                    +3

                    @wiipantz:

                    the tenant reported the defect

                    Precisely. When there was no defect. Other than with the tenant.

                    • wiipantz on 24/01/2020 - 08:51
                      +4

                      @HighAndDry: correct and the agent should have verified that. case closed end thread owner doesn't even need to know.

                      • HighAndDry on 24/01/2020 - 08:52
                        -2

                        @wiipantz: Tenant could've verified before making the, again, erroneous report of a non existent defect. "Case closed" before it even gets to the agent.

                        The tenant is not a kid who needs their hand held.

                        • wiipantz on 24/01/2020 - 08:54
                          +3

                          @HighAndDry: irrelevant and you are making a circular argument. The agent didn't do their job, simple. They get a report no matter what it is, they verify it's not emergency and then can act accordingly, in this case they were lazy. You can keep saying it's the tenants error, so what. They reported it, the agent should do their part in this case.

                          • HighAndDry on 24/01/2020 - 08:55
                            +1

                            @wiipantz:

                            You can keep saying it's the tenants error, so what

                            At least you admit it's the tenant's error. Where I come from, you make a mistake you pay for it.

                            • wiipantz on 24/01/2020 - 08:56
                              +1

                              @HighAndDry: La la land may exist for some. Surely you concede the Agent didn't fulfil thier job, they get reports from tenants and need to act in best interest, even if that is "no, silly press the other buttons!' over the phone. It's not hard really but that's what thier function is, in this case they didn't verify the report it's on them done.

                              • HighAndDry on 24/01/2020 - 08:59

                                @wiipantz: Agent believed the tenant's report in good faith and assumed the tenant had two brain cells to rub together. Tenant apparently didn't and was the one in error.

                                Yeah no point going on with this convo, you obviously believe tenants can do no wrong - if they burn down the kitchen no doubt it's because the agent didn't fire-proof it enough.

                                • wiipantz on 24/01/2020 - 09:00
                                  +3

                                  @HighAndDry: Irrelevant, good faith isn't thier function. They should have verified. You know this… or maybe not. Shame on you.

                                  • sakurashu on 24/01/2020 - 15:04
                                    +2

                                    @wiipantz: I'm with HighAndDry - For both the chain to the REA and the owner it's definitely fair to make basic assumptions that the failure is in fact most likely to be an actual failure.

                                    Extrapolate this scenario to repeated call-outs to the REA/Owner when the Tenant can't operate a hinge in order to open the window or can't find the lock to a window because it's at the top. Are these still all reasonable queries and you believe the responsibility should sit with the REA to come out and verify the issues? Either at the REA level or at the Owner level you'd just have these people dropping the contracts - which just shifts the core issue to be somebody elses problem, it doesn't actually solve anything.

                                    There needs to be more personal responsibility in the world - not less.

                  • BartholemewH on 25/01/2020 - 11:42

                    @wiipantz: I see what you did there.

    • [Deactivated] on 23/01/2020 - 17:11
      +10

      Do not renew lease.

      Why? The RE is being paid to manage the property and OP relied on his assessment of the situation, not on the tenant's. RE was also the one who contracted a tradie with a $200 callout fee.

      RE should absorb the cost. Mine has for something not too dissimilar.

      Edit: Typed this comment, got distracted by Spidey and the dog and now my comment is redundant :(

    • Vote for Pedro on 24/01/2020 - 16:07
      +2

      This is why the rental market is shyte. Tenant did nothing wrong. Reported a problem and let owner/agent decide course of action

      • [Deactivated] on 24/01/2020 - 17:13
        +5

        Different side of the same coin - the owner also did nothing wrong but he is out $200.

        • Vote for Pedro on 24/01/2020 - 17:21
          +1

          So tenant should just not report problems?

          And it’s the owners property. So yes they have the obligation to either act on issues however they choose or not to act on them. You don’t blame the tenant for reporting.

          • [Deactivated] on 24/01/2020 - 17:57
            +4

            @Vote for Pedro: No one is blaming the tenant for reporting, hence why I said OP should still pay.

            One can exercise an entitlement and still be stupid for exercising it.

            • Vote for Pedro on 24/01/2020 - 18:12

              @[Deactivated]: Your language is mischievous. Again tries to make tenant look stupid or entitled.

              I’ve got a two button intercom that looks like it originated in the seventies. Let me tell you it is not intuitive and has no logical markings. If it started buzzing, the best I could try is a random pressing of buttons to see what happens.

              Thankfully I’ve worked out which one operates the gates and i do not ever touch the other one.

              • [Deactivated] on 24/01/2020 - 18:15
                +2

                @Vote for Pedro:

                Your language is mischievous. Again tries to make tenant look stupid or entitled.

                Uhhh. I'm not sure how to make it clearer.

                OP liable - pay $200.

                Tenant stupid - can't operate two buttons.

                I'm not mincing words and I'm not calling the tenant "entitled". The tenant is entitled to call the REA. I think you're unfamiliar with the other acceptable use of the term entitled.

                • Vote for Pedro on 24/01/2020 - 18:24
                  +2

                  @[Deactivated]: Tenant is not stupid. That’s the issue. You assume tenant didn’t try anything. Your ‘do not renew the lease’ comment is everything wrong with tenancy laws. Basically penalise tenant for reporting a problem.

                  What’s probably truer is the agent is either incompetent or in on the callout fee rort. But ok, let’s target the tenant

                  • [Deactivated] on 24/01/2020 - 18:27

                    @Vote for Pedro:

                    penalise

                    No it is not. There is no penalty.

                    The tenant was entitled to report a problem. The landlord is entitled to not renew the lease at the end of the contract.

                    Both parties are entitled to these options. Either both parties are being penalized for their respective action (or impending actions) or neither are.

                    • Vote for Pedro on 24/01/2020 - 18:32
                      +7

                      @[Deactivated]: Your comment here is absolutely everything wrong with tenancy laws.

                      You are 100% correct that both parties are entitled to their respective position. But what you’re actually saying is “If a tenant reports problems, boot them out at end of lease”.

                      Property owner provides facility in need of repair, tenant reports it, tenant gets booted at end of lease. Tenant then is scared in future rentals to report problems. Goodo

                      • [Deactivated] on 24/01/2020 - 19:33
                        -2

                        @Vote for Pedro: If they want the luxuries of a permanent residential address, they should consider buying.

                        • dansblackcat on 24/01/2020 - 19:45
                          +6

                          @[Deactivated]: Two taps on a sink, one hot one cold. Tenant complains of no hot water. Plumber is called and charges $200 call out to turn the hot tap on instead of the cold. The taps came with no user manual. Who pays the bill?

                          • [Deactivated] on 24/01/2020 - 20:12
                            +4

                            @dansblackcat: Society as clearly we've allowed common sense to die a slow and painful death.

                          • crentist on 24/01/2020 - 21:56

                            @dansblackcat: Trouble with your example is that a tenant could complain of no hot water intermittently and the rest would still happen exactly the same.
                            Similar, OPs case could have started with the tenant mentioning a strange buzzing when muted. All the technician seems to have done is confirmed that there is a strange buzzing, but not why.

                            REAs often don't make much effort to understand or communicate reported problems, but are quick to hand tradies a set of keys and throw them at the problem. And tenants are expected to tell the REA of anything wrong, big or small.

                        • Vote for Pedro on 24/01/2020 - 20:04
                          -5

                          @[Deactivated]: Attitudes like yours are everything wrong with this world.

                          • [Deactivated] on 24/01/2020 - 20:11
                            +1

                            @Vote for Pedro: You seem to say everything is wrong without being open to considering both perspectives.

                  • Ti-au on 26/01/2020 - 17:26

                    @Vote for Pedro: This.

              • brendanm on 25/01/2020 - 08:25
                +4

                @Vote for Pedro: The tenant is stupid.

                • Vote for Pedro on 25/01/2020 - 12:43
                  -2

                  @brendanm: And intercom faulty

                  • brendanm on 25/01/2020 - 15:19

                    @Vote for Pedro: Nope, the tenant is faulty. Intercom works fine.

                    • Vote for Pedro on 25/01/2020 - 15:42

                      @brendanm: I dont know of any intercoms that buzz when the mute button is pressed. Maybe it’s a feature rather than a fault?

                      Ps, i see the tag team is working well

                      • brendanm on 25/01/2020 - 16:14

                        @Vote for Pedro: I don't know of any intercoms full stop, as I've never lived in an apartment. However, I do know how to use a bit of common sense and troubleshoot. Tag team?

                        • Vote for Pedro on 25/01/2020 - 16:36
                          -1

                          @brendanm: So you have no idea what you’re talking about, but let’s take a shot at someone and call them stupid and that they have no common sense. Seems typical these days that those with minimal knowledge of anything like to call out others for alleged ‘common sense’ failures.

                          • brendanm on 25/01/2020 - 17:31

                            @Vote for Pedro: There are two buttons. My two year old could figure out that if it was doing something she didn't like, she would try to press the buttons. There are monkeys that do much more complicated things than this.

                            • Vote for Pedro on 25/01/2020 - 17:37

                              @brendanm: Doesn’t take away from the fact the intercom is likely faulty. Unless buzzing sounds are normal when mute button is pressed.

                              But since you don’t know, perhaps you should take a look in the mirror before calling people stupid.

                              • brendanm on 25/01/2020 - 17:45
                                +1

                                @Vote for Pedro: Considering an intercom service technician states that it was fine, I think the intercom is fine.

                                No, I won't, as a can perform troubleshooting myself.

                                • Vote for Pedro on 25/01/2020 - 18:13

                                  @brendanm: Round of applause for you.

                                  • brendanm on 25/01/2020 - 18:35
                                    +1

                                    @Vote for Pedro: Thanks, although common sense shouldn't be worthy of applause really.

                                • screensaver on 25/01/2020 - 18:15

                                  @brendanm: so far the tenant has been called goose, monkey, entitled.stupid, idiot, brain dead etc. Well the landlord also has some titles = tightass. whinger, cheapskate, tax avoider, greedy, ignorant, bully

                                  • brendanm on 25/01/2020 - 18:36
                                    +2

                                    @screensaver: Landlord was happy to pay if there was an issue, hardly a tightass or a bully.

                                    • screensaver on 25/01/2020 - 18:54

                                      @brendanm: yeah he would have been ecstatic. He should realise he is running a business, which does have tax deductible expenses.

                                      • brendanm on 25/01/2020 - 19:25

                                        @screensaver: Hurray! He gets to pay $200 and maybe get $30 back. Seems like a great deal.

                                        • screensaver on 25/01/2020 - 20:24

                                          @brendanm: hope you are not an accountant

                                          • brendanm on 25/01/2020 - 21:26
                                            +1

                                            @screensaver: I hope you aren't, as you obviously don't understand how tax write offs work. Owner doesn't get the whole lot back, they can claim it as a deduction from their income for the year. If op was paying the highest marginal rate at 45%, they would possibly get $90 back, depending on a lot of other factors.

                                            • screensaver on 25/01/2020 - 22:19

                                              @brendanm: ill believe it when I see it. Hes probably too tight to hire an accountant anyway

                                  • [Deactivated] on 25/01/2020 - 20:07

                                    @screensaver:

                                    landlord also has some titles = tightass. whinger, cheapskate, tax avoider, greedy, ignorant, bully

                                    Tax avoidance? Are you just looking for extra words to add?

                                    Bully? The OP hasn't even taken any action.

                                    Ignorant? Maybe as he/she is wondering where they stand.

                                    Whinger? When someone cost you $200, I think any sane person would have a whinge.

                • Ti-au on 26/01/2020 - 17:26

                  @brendanm: Can you actually prove that?

        • Krankite on 25/01/2020 - 19:58
          +1

          In this situation the fault is that no manual was provided for the intercom. If there was some form of instructions available then the fault would be with the tenant instead the fault is with the REA/Owner. The REA agent should have provided a copy of the manual prior to the call out.

        • p1 ama on 26/01/2020 - 00:47
          +2

          You two are both blaming the wrong person.

          If anyone deserves to pay this, it's the REA. They are literally paid by the landlord to resolve these sorts of issues and act in their best interests.

          This is a classic lazy REA who doesn't give a flying shit and irresponsibly calls out someone with a $200 callout fee. Make him pay for not doing his job.

          This is exactly why I refuse to let REA's handle things. I'll give the tenant my own number and they're always welcome to give me a call if they have any problems. I'll try and help them myself and if things need to be fixed, I'll call someone who isn't going to charge a $200 callout fee because I'm not a moron REA.

          • Ti-au on 26/01/2020 - 18:25
            -1

            @p1 ama: Nope.

            The REA manages the property. They chase up the rent and chase up missed payments, etc.
            The REA told the owner of the problem and they said get it fixed. Well it got fixed.
            If the owner does not like the fix, then they can organise said fix themselves - such as paying a handyman.

    • Choc0 on 24/01/2020 - 17:37
      +2

      Pay the fee, claim the tax deduction.

      Increase rent by $5 a week more than you otherwise planned to.

  • notabigdeal on 23/01/2020 - 16:38
    +27

    Your Rental Agency at fault! In an ideal world, the property agent should have given all the instructions to the tenant when they moved in. When the tenant complained, the agent could have visited the property before recommending a call-out for an expert. In your case, Both of these didn't happen. If I was in this situation, I would pay the call out fee for once and advise the agent to be diligent in solving the future requests.

    • mbck on 23/01/2020 - 16:42
      +12

      Yeh crappy agent. Happy to get commission. They should go in and check first. Then ask for an expert opinion.

      Had the same problem. Renter said something weong with light. May be the fuse or something. Agent wanted to get electrician. I said nope, let me check. Replaced light bulb and all is well.

      Changed agent

  • Bargain80 on 23/01/2020 - 16:41
    +6

    split the fee between you and the tenants and ask the agent to find someone else to contact if it needs repair. $200 call out fee is outrages.

    • dcep on 23/01/2020 - 16:44
      +22

      $200 "call out" (including $100 kickback for agent)

      • Slippery Fish on 24/01/2020 - 18:06

        Sounds like it.

      • tryagain on 25/01/2020 - 15:23
        +1

        I was waiting for this comment, I semi regularly get a call from someone doing an advertising booklet on behalf of a real estate agency, the proposition is that I pay several hundred dollars to a thousandish dollars to be in a booklet that they give to tenants of AND use for their property management service.

        The cost per eyeball is nowhere near worthwhile for of advertisement, it's just basically a kick back to the agency for them to then use you on the properties they manage.

  • dcep on 23/01/2020 - 16:42
    +26

    tell the rental agent that you'll terminate their service if they can't sort it out

    • wiipantz on 23/01/2020 - 16:59

      This is prob the most reasonable way if you wanted change, they should have at least acknowledged it and visited first as a non-emergency call out in lieu of instructions. Meh… Australia and it's property fetish though

  • Tee Rex Arms on 23/01/2020 - 17:08
    +5

    So where’s the manual

    • SnakeCasablanca on 25/01/2020 - 08:35

      Where is the basic common sense troubleshooting?

      • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 25/01/2020 - 16:20

        common sense troubleshooting is literally reading the (profanity) manual.

        • SnakeCasablanca on 27/01/2020 - 18:56

          Is that the dictionary definition? Could it also include experimenting with two buttons until it (profanity) works.

  • Seraphin7 on 23/01/2020 - 17:17
    +2

    I am of the opinion it is reasonable to expect that the tenant would attempt to have a look, listen and even press both buttons before requesting a repair.

    Couldn't agree more.

    Furthermore, I find it pretty rough I am now being asked to pay the invoice.

    Yep, that sucks @ss.

    However, I am not keen on going through an RTA disagreement resolution process over this amount of money.

    And there's the rub. This will come down to a battle of wills between you, the tenant, the agent, and the bloke who came out. How long do you want to hold out for? What's your tolerance for dealing with grief? Will your life be better by copping the $200 and moving on, or by simply refusing and accepting whatever may come for the chance of not paying.

    • Vote for Pedro on 24/01/2020 - 16:55
      +2

      The tenant reported the problem. Didn’t ‘ask’ for a repair but sought for the problem to be resolved.

  • whooah1979 on 23/01/2020 - 17:30

    I agreed

    The party that makes the final decision pays.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join