Since The Tenant Can Negotiate on Rent, Should You Be Able to Negotiate on Council and Utility Rates?

spc12go on 16/04/2020 - 10:05
Last edited 16/04/2020 - 10:30

Got me thinking since the tenants can re-negotiate on rent. Why shouldn’t I be able to negotiate on council rate and utility charges.

Not talking about deferred payment or payment schedule but actual reduction on the charges based on your rent reduction. The government is able to mandate this, they should be able to mandate the same for the charges. We all have to share the love, it’s only fair. After all council and utility companies are in better financial position than 99% of us. Bare in mind a reduction in rent, doesn’t mean you get a reduction on out going. Rates and charges, strata and repair & maintenance still have to be paid in full.

Has anyone tried and is there a way to voice this to the government.

Let me know your thoughts on this.

Poll Options expired

  • 160
    Yes, should applied to landlords
  • 181
    No, landlord should harden up
  • 25
    Should be applicable to everyone
  • 21
    Bikies
Financial

Comments

  • Hithere on 16/04/2020 - 10:13
    +8

    is there a way to voice this to the government.

    Phone your local MP or call into their office and ask them for their thoughts. You never know they may actually follow up on your idea.

    • EightImmortals on 16/04/2020 - 10:19
      +20

      Hahahahahahahaaaaaaaaa. Sorry, too early for side-splitting jokes like that. :)

      • Diji1 on 16/04/2020 - 10:42
        +12

        You're laughing because the Government never helps out property investors?

        I think the joke might be on you.

        • EightImmortals on 16/04/2020 - 11:05
          +11

          No, I'm laughing at the notion that the government would listen and follow up on the OP's request. Unless it's ASIO of course, as everyone knows they are the only part of government that DOES listen. (Yes I realise the poster was being sarcastic)

          • Loopenip on 17/04/2020 - 22:17

            @EightImmortals: M8 the gov. doesn't even listen to ASIO - remember Gladys Liu?

            • valour on 19/04/2020 - 00:24

              @Loopenip: or Angus Taylor. More like ASIO listens to what the government wants.

        • ssquid on 16/04/2020 - 21:52

          I thought they were laughing at the suggestion an MP would have their local office open to the public.

        • OzzyOzbourne on 17/04/2020 - 16:44
          +3

          Only if you give them $50k in a plastic bag (reusable of course)

  • vinni9284 on 16/04/2020 - 10:19
    +7

    negotiate on council rate ……

    LOL .. good luck with that!

    They are becoming the new "Private Health Insurance" regime.

    Get more for less

    • Diji1 on 16/04/2020 - 10:49
      +6

      They are becoming the new "Private Health Insurance" regime.

      Incorrect.

      Councils were always there.

      Fools voted to privatise health only a couple of decades ago.

      And after three decades of privatisation causing an economic disaster to the country, literally by removing their money, the same fools are still voting for it.

      They live in an alternate reality, created by the one news corporation that operates in Australia, where it's cheaper and not causing an economic disaster.

      • vinni9284 on 16/04/2020 - 10:53
        +1

        I mean in the sense of providing less services for more cost (increase in rates for councils as for premiums for PHI, for little gain - DIY/cover less)

        • dgel543 on 19/04/2020 - 21:18
          -1

          You know that unlike say car insurance the government actually restricts our health funds from charging different premiums for different people right (regardless of gender, lifestyle, underlying health conditions, other perceived risks etc etc). Our premiums go up every year simply because of rising treatment costs plus we have to fund the shortfall for the ageing population, which naturally is increasingly spending more time in hospitals, either that or do away with PHI's and the public system instantly collapses, tbh it's a fact of life in Aus, unless you can get the government to remove the community rating system but then the elderly/vulnerable won't be able to afford insurance =(

          • vinni9284 on 19/04/2020 - 21:52
            +1

            @dgel543: You sound like a typical PHI rep response when you try to negotiate a better deal.

            "Sorry. We can't do much as the government has capped the discount to 12% everything is going up, your premium etc" "it's best to have PHI, just in case"… good excuse …

            But then you see them gaining $Billions P.A. with their profits as they pay Jack to customers who claim that have poured thousands of dollars over a decade or more on paying premiums as they expect something back when they claim.

            May I ask, do you work for a PHI?

      • ThithLord on 16/04/2020 - 10:53
        +1

        But Scotty is doing the best he can!!1!

      • Scrooge McDuck on 16/04/2020 - 19:52
        +4

        And after three decades of privatisation causing an economic disaster to the country,

        What economic disaster!? We haven't had a recession since 90/91:

        https://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&…

        • [Deactivated] on 16/04/2020 - 23:32
          +6

          What economic disaster!?

          The one where people who didn't take risk/hardwork/invest/save didn't end up being better than average.

          So they whine and moan about economic disaster.

          Gotta blame something. Gotta feel better.

      • mattyman on 17/04/2020 - 10:23
        +1

        I read this in Dwight's voice.

  • savemore on 16/04/2020 - 10:21
    +8

    I would have thought that negative gearing allowed for landlords to make a loss to claim it against their tax (if they are still working and employed).

    • vinni9284 on 16/04/2020 - 10:24

      Good point, however aren't they try to claw some back by getting landlords to pay Land Tax?

    • spc12go on 16/04/2020 - 10:29
      +8

      Not everyone is negative geared.

      Also what has been drafted by the state government is still not very clear. It is very vague on the landtax waiver and reduction. Well at least what I have read in the papers.

      • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 16/04/2020 - 12:24
        +3

        Well at least what I have read in the papers.

        Your first mistake

        Also what has been drafted by the state government is still not very clear.

        ….because nothing has been drafted. Not a single word, sentence nor piece of paper has gone to parliament yet for passing.

      • whatthecrappin on 17/04/2020 - 15:50
        +1

        my land tax actually went up???????? must be because its worth more now……………… in this climate……

      • squaredonut on 17/04/2020 - 16:45

        This. Also anyone who has paid land tax knows it comes at Jan, and if you do it in 3 instalments youll be done paying by April.

        Last time I called OSR, the idiots said there is never a way to get a pro rata refund, I will wait and see how the hell they can apply a 25% discount back to you…

        Also the 3 month payment deferral is BS too… I can always call OSR for an extension.

    • EightImmortals on 16/04/2020 - 11:07

      Negative geared claims only come off your yearly income, they are not directly refunded.

      • TilacVIP on 17/04/2020 - 08:07

        It is if you look at it another way. If not for negative gearing you may pay $xx amount more than you would.

        • EightImmortals on 17/04/2020 - 11:11
          +6

          Yes. There are 'some people' who think that for some reason income from property should be denied the tax deductions and depreciations that apply to other sources of income.

  • Godric on 16/04/2020 - 10:23

    Good Luck on that one, please comment back their responses

  • Archi on 16/04/2020 - 10:28

    tenants can negotiate on rent…landlords have an option to agree or disagree
    landlords can negotiate rates cut… councils have an option to agree or disagree

    the difference? I already know what the council will say

    • valleyrain on 16/04/2020 - 10:42
      +7

      there's another difference. If the landlords disagree, there are now restrictions on what they can and can't do. The same doesn't apply to councils.

  • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 16/04/2020 - 10:32
    +7

    Rates and charges are related to an asset you own and have beneficial title in.

    A tenancy is not either of those things.

    • valleyrain on 16/04/2020 - 10:44
      -2

      are you saying rates and charges don't need to be paid if you don't own something? That'll be good news to tenants.

      • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 16/04/2020 - 10:46
        +3

        Nice straw man. No.

        • valleyrain on 16/04/2020 - 10:53
          -3

          Rates and charges are related to usage of assets, nothing to do with ownership

      • Chandler on 17/04/2020 - 11:29
        +3

        No. I think (part of?) what zeggie is saying is that you would be paying rates and charges whether the house is occupied or not.

    • paaj on 17/04/2020 - 14:24
      -1

      It appears that if the asset is now generating less income, then the asset value is lower. Therefore, in a sense, Rates and Charges should reduce in line with the expected value of the asset. Doubt the council is going to do that.

      • ssquid on 17/04/2020 - 16:27
        +1

        That's exactly what they do - rates are based on the value of the property and change each year.

      • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 18/04/2020 - 07:25
        +1

        Rates are assessed on land value. Not "asset value".

        • jamhot on 20/04/2020 - 10:02

          *Depending on which state you live in.

      • Dingo on 19/04/2020 - 20:30

        Rates have nothing to do with the revenue generated by a property asset. And the value of the property has minimal effect on the rates charged.
        I'm not sure where you folks live, but I'm pretty happy with my council. I see them maintaining the area to a very good standard and I expect to have to pay for that. Then again I guess that if you and the people in your local government area are willing to accept a reduction in the frequency and size of your rubbish collection, a reduction in the maintenance of roads, footpaths and drainage, a reduction in the maintenance of parks, public trees and sporting fields, a reduction in the number of public libraries, etc. Then you'd definitely be entitled to a reduction in rates. I wouldn't want to live there though…

        • ssquid on 19/04/2020 - 23:45
          -1

          How does the value of the property have a minimal effect when rates are literally a proportion of the council's valuation?

          • Dingo on 20/04/2020 - 00:00
            -1

            @ssquid: Because rates are calculated proportionally for the entire council area. So if all property values fall, the proportion is still the same for your property and the $ figure remains the same.

  • mbck on 16/04/2020 - 10:32
    +14

    Council are almost up there with the term useless. Sure we need services, but the wastage is incomprehensible. The dodgy contracts, the hiding behind bureaucratic red tape to protect themselves.

    We need to streamline council. Make them a whole lot more accountable. And reduce their salaries. They don't deserve that much.

    • netjock on 16/04/2020 - 11:09

      Why do you think there is so much push back on having an independent commission against corruption? You'll find we might be just as bad as the Chinese Communists on a small scale.

    • GG57 on 16/04/2020 - 11:14

      For clarity, who specifically should have a reduced salary? The council staff or the elected councillors?

      • mbck on 16/04/2020 - 11:56

        Councillors.

        • GG57 on 16/04/2020 - 12:07
          +9

          You have all the power in regard to councillors.
          You can oppose them at elections, you can campaign against them, you can attend council meetings and address them directly, etc.

          My local councillor stood on the basis that he would not take / use any 'allowances' that are available for use (e.g. travel, meals, etc.). He still complies with that, years later, and openly questions other councillors when they seek approval to travel or attend other events that incur 'allowances' as to the benefits that it would return to the ratepayers.

          The staff at my council seem to be proficient at what they do, and are subject to performance reviews etc., much like any other job.

          • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 16/04/2020 - 12:19
            +6

            @GG57: GG57 is completely correct. We all have the power.

            Most tend to just put in minimal research, minimal effort in regards to elections and other matters and just whinge about it later. Key example - City of Casey in VIC. mbck probably doesn't even know the names of their council reps. You want change? Get off your ass.

          • SkMed on 17/04/2020 - 15:56

            @GG57: I can say without a doubt everyone I work with at Council (in my team at least) put in 110%. However it's usually an uphill battle against red tape getting things done efficiently lot of the time.

            I was flabbergasted coming from the private sector to local council at how little I could get done in the same amount of time :( At the end of the day though most of the red tape is understandable and there for a good reason. But man is it frustrating, slow and difficult to get things done sometimes! I don't think most of general public understands exactly how difficult and time consuming simple tasks can become.

          • Repi on 17/04/2020 - 16:17

            @GG57: Your local councillor sounds more like the exception.
            Our local councillors needed a paid study trip to India to explore trade opportunities. Ask them why and it gets quiet, vote in another lot and they need a study trip to somewhere.
            Our neighbouring council has been stacked with developers, turns out they didn't have the good of the community at heart.

            • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 18/04/2020 - 07:28
              +1

              @Repi: Run for Council yourself?

              The lack of good councillors could possibly stem from the fact that councils are rubbished and cop shit from every possible direction IRL and online.

        • SkMed on 17/04/2020 - 15:45

          Was gonna say, I took a pay cut to take up my job at my local council lol.

          • BartholemewH on 18/04/2020 - 01:00

            @SkMed: Exactly. Pay rates are terrible for anyone above sh!t kicker at council.

  • Diji1 on 16/04/2020 - 10:43

    You can already negotiate with the Council.

    Call them and explain that you cannot pay rates immediately and propose a payment schedule.

    • Eeples on 16/04/2020 - 11:11
      +3

      I agree.

      OP, if your renters aren't paying the full rent at the moment contact council and try to arrange a payment plan or a waiving of interest. You wont know until you try.

      And of course, as with most investment properties you took on the risk, and can always sell.

    • JimmyF on 16/04/2020 - 11:40
      +1

      The OP wants a REDUCTION in rates as they are giving a reduction in the rent, not a payment plan.

  • BadHorse on 16/04/2020 - 11:29
    +32

    All investments are risky - why should landlords expect a guaranteed return on investment when everyone else has had their cut - dividends, interest rates etc etc.

    • JimmyF on 16/04/2020 - 11:51
      +14

      Correct, people seem to forget that 'investing' has risk with it. Its not a guaranteed return like some seem to think it should be. Guess what? some peoples investments right now are not making money.

      I've got shares, they have had a hit, who do I go ask for a handout on that loss?

      My sharefund has also taken a hit, its my retirement fund, who covers that loss?

      I own my own house, so don't get a reduction in rent or a pause on my loan repayments for 6 months, thats not 'fair' is it?

        • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 16/04/2020 - 12:22
          +4

          yawn

        • JimmyF on 16/04/2020 - 12:44
          +9

          If I am not happy with the government mandate. I should be able to tell the tenant. Thank you but the least is now terminated. Please vacate the property so I can find other arrangements that better suit my requirements for the next 6 months.

          Its not free rent, so follow the processes the gov has outlined for when people don't pay rent after the 6 month period.

          Some people are actually better off by taking back the property and live in there and then go claim the hand out

          And what about the place they had been in before that?

          If the government wants the market to sort thing out then let the market sort it self out. Don’t put legislation on one hand and let the market decides on the other.

          Don't be a greedy pig, people still owe you the 'rent', its all about letting people getting through the next 6 months.

        • Dingo on 19/04/2020 - 20:38
          +1

          I'm glad that we live in a society that has specifically organised itself against the selfish and heartless approach you outlined in your post.

          • spc12go on 20/04/2020 - 01:06

            @Dingo: What I have written is based on reply written by the others. Using a house as an investment, and people taking account for their actions, behaviours. And the risk associated with investment etc. it is purely a logical response with no emotion attached. This is a discussion forum and it is purely a hypothetical question that I have asked, not based on my personal situation or scenario. My response may or may not be right, and also it may not be ethically correct. But we need to be judging all the response with the same standard, not pick and choose when convenient.

            Also unfortunately we do live in a selfish society. Everything we do is almost profit driven. Look at how the big corporations behave by tax minimisation. profit shifting and the absurd pay of the CEO. Also how the politician accepts campaign donations from corporations and developers. As if those donations came from people who genuinely care about the politics rather than those seeking to gain an influence on a policy or DA.

            We always have people living below the poverty line. There are more and more people becoming homeless everyday. And no one cared, or simply conveniently over look the inconvenient fact that, these are the real vulnerable group of people. And now all the sudden some people develop a conscious and cared about the people impacted by the pandemic.

            I truely hope this is a genuine shift in attitude not because of their own vested interest.

    • spc12go on 16/04/2020 - 12:19
      -7

      No one is asking for guarantee return or hand out. Just let people terminate the lease and let the market decides.

      • JimmyF on 16/04/2020 - 12:46
        +13

        You are asking for a handout, you want a reduction on your rates = hand out

        You are asking for a guarantee return, as you don't want to drop your rent to reflect the current market conditions.

        • spc12go on 16/04/2020 - 13:00
          -5

          What is the current market condition? Free rent?

          Let people terminate the lease and if the rent is high it will drop and those with high rent will get zero return. Let the market decide.

          I don’t have issue with my tenants they are doing well. And I have contacted them if they need anything let the agent or me know.
          I am actually better off if they don’t pay me any rent for the next 6 months. It is much better to join Centrelink and receive all the other “benefits”

          Risks associated with investment comes from the markets and the macro environment. Not from Government meddling, last I check we are still a democratic country with capitalism market

          • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 16/04/2020 - 13:17
            +4

            @spc12go:

            Not from Government meddling, last I check we are still a democratic country

            Democratic seems to be another word you don't know the definition of.

          • JimmyF on 16/04/2020 - 13:20
            +10

            @spc12go:

            What is the current market condition?

            Record high unemployment, but you should know that already

            Let people terminate the lease

            I don't see you offering a free 'break lease' for any tenant you have on your books mid lease, so thats not an option.

            I am actually better off if they don’t pay me any rent for the next 6 months. It is much better to join Centrelink and receive all the other “benefits”

            So what is your problem then?

            Not from Government meddling

            A one off temporary policy change to protect people. The renters still owe rent, the only change was you can't do a rent eviction for 6 months.

            Honestly the change was to protect them from landlords like you from the way you carry on.

          • crashloaded on 16/04/2020 - 17:46

            @spc12go: Just don't pay your rates and see what happens, delay the court process as long as possible, maybe council will give up the fight 🙃

            • Kangal on 17/04/2020 - 17:53

              @crashloaded: They will just take the deed of the land/property from you.

              You have to work within the rules of the government, they do not play by your rules. Unless you have considerable power (ships, tanks, copters, jets), you will always play by their rules. Of course, you are free to sleeze your way into parliament and change the rules, so that they may be closer to your favour, and that career is what is known as politicians.

          • Dingo on 19/04/2020 - 20:44
            +1

            @spc12go: In the middle of a pandemic you'd kick people out on the streets so that you could make a few extra bucks. It seems extreme to me and fortunately the sort of thing that is not supported in this country.

    • BestofOZB on 18/04/2020 - 23:19

      Huh? They just expect the rent to be paid 🤷‍♂️

  • Cheeper on 16/04/2020 - 11:32
    +1

    Before a tenant can "negotiate" on rent they should demonstrate that they have been financially affected by the current crisis.
    If your tenant is on a govt fixed income, say aged or dsp pension, their income would not have been affected.
    If a LL does grant a rent reduction to a tenant who has been genuinely affected financially then all associated costs levied on the LL should also be reduced accordingly.
    Insurance, rates, strata fees, agents fees, etc… all need to be discounted as well to be fair.
    Some tenants think this is a chance for them all to benefit from a rent reduction, not so.
    If they are adamant they are entitled to a reduction just let them out of the lease and they can find alternate accomodation at the price they would be happy with.

  • slow on 16/04/2020 - 12:21
    -1

    Seems like "negotiate" on rent is wishful thinking. Seems we are heading for situation where they can just declare anarchy and stop paying without any justification and the evil owner can't do anything

    • [Deactivated] on 16/04/2020 - 13:29

      It would appear that you can evict a tenant in Vic if they are able to pay rent but wilfully do not.

  • tsunamisurfer on 16/04/2020 - 12:46
    -2

    Landlords should harden up, periods of vacancy are expected when investing in property.

    My problem is with the tenants, they should be evicted on Day 1 of non-payment.

    • Eeples on 16/04/2020 - 13:46
      +4

      Really day 1?

    • Mechz on 16/04/2020 - 15:09
      +1

      If someone did this to me I'd be inclined to leave some candles lit near the curtains.

  • ihbh on 16/04/2020 - 12:57
    +3

    How far should it go and where does it stop? You negotiating discounts at supermarkets and other retailers?

    • modsec802 on 16/04/2020 - 20:50
      +1

      I wish the companies I invest in would negotiate with me before reducing their dividends

    • BestofOZB on 18/04/2020 - 23:22

      The supermarkets didn't go on TV and told tenants they couldn't be evicted. I agree if they mandate landlords not to evict tenants, they should mandate councils to waive rates if tenants are not paying, or something.

  • kanmen on 16/04/2020 - 13:13
    +4

    I feel like threads of this vein have been posted like once a week for the past month but anyway.

    If you want your bins to stop being collected, your roads not to continue being fixed, and other essential health services provided by your council to stop then sure. Any reduction in council taxes should be based off actual hardship.

    • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 16/04/2020 - 13:19
      +8

      They could always just sell the asset that requires them to pay rates and charges. Then they are unencumbered and free!

      • whooah1979 on 16/04/2020 - 18:23
        +4

        Why was this comment neg? Anyone that can’t keep an investment profitable should consider selling it.

        • Binchicken22 on 17/04/2020 - 16:04
          +4

          I think what's been conveniently glossed over here in a lot of the comments about OP needing to "harden up", "just sell it" etc is that he's not actually worried about making a loss.

          What he seems annoyed about is the government stepping in and saying he has to "give away" his "asset" for the next 6 months at least, whilst still being required to foot the bill on mortgage, maintance, rates etc.

          I'm sure they'd be a hell of a stink kicked up if the government just stepping into the dairy industry and said, "oh sorry guys, people really need milk but a lot can't afford it, so you'll be giving it away for the next 6 months… GL with keeping the cows fed."

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join