Tenants Have Handed Back Possession Early during 90 Day Notice Period

LRoscoCheapo on 07/03/2021 - 10:19
Last edited 07/03/2021 - 10:33 by 1 other user

My wife and I recently became landlords.

Signed a 6 month lease, rolled over into monthly. We decided we wanted to make changes to the property and it wasn't going well with the tenants for reasons I won't get into so we gave the tenants 90 days notice to vacate as per fair-trade NSW advice. We even waited until after Christmas period because we wanted to be fair on the tenants.

But now the tenants have vacated before the 90 day expiration and without any communication to us. We were deliberately misled, earlier we offered to let them use the trailer to transport some heavy items. We asked when could I come install the new range hood. The tenants had many opportunities to do the right thing and let us know they had found a new place and would be vacating early.

On Friday a moving truck arrives to our surprise, and later that day the tenants hand back keys to us. They then informed us (rather gleefully) they would not be paying any more rent - like they got one over on us.

Now we have an vacant property and we haven't even started to look for new tenants because we had more than 30 days to go until the 90 day notice period

Do we have any recourse? The bond is still with NSW Fair-Trading BTW.

Surely the tenants had to give some prior warning before they handed back possession.

The tenants deliberately deceived me so naturally I feel cheated. Not seeking revenge, just some sense of fairness/justice.

I'll call fair-trading when they open again tomorrow but appreciate advice on this forum as I'm very stressed.

Cheers

Financial

closed Comments

aldudeau on 07/03/2021 - 10:26

+392

You gave the tenants notice to move out…and they moved out? Sounds really unfair.
- SF3 on 07/03/2021 - 12:17
  
  +48
  
  When things are “unfair“.
  
  Who ya gonna call!
  
  Australia’s, no.1 place for airing it, post in OzB Forums.
  - deme on 07/03/2021 - 23:13
    
    +13
    
    Used to be ACA
    - SF3 on 07/03/2021 - 23:25
      
      +2
      
      Cut out the “middleman”, go direct to the public, that’s what social media is for :).
      - deme on 07/03/2021 - 23:26
        
        +4
        
        @SF3: Suprised OP didn't call 000
        
        SF3 on 07/03/2021 - 23:28
        
        @deme: You have Bikies for that.
        
        Bikies on 08/03/2021 - 19:16
        
        +1
        
        @SF3: Can confirm.
  - Bottom G on 08/03/2021 - 12:44
    
    +2
    
    Who ya gonna call!
    
    Ghost Busters!
- SF3 on 08/03/2021 - 17:42
  
  +12
  
  Wow at 174+ for comment 1.
  
  OP should install a rotisserie.
  - jake-sun on 09/03/2021 - 19:37
    
    I just made it to exactly 300
pharkurnell on 07/03/2021 - 10:35

+38

We decided we wanted to make changes to the property and it wasn't going well with the tenants for reasons i won't get into

… your changing what they signed up to rent.

Apparently its hard to find rentals at moment - finish your renovation, then just advertise it , get new tenants and move on
- deme on 07/03/2021 - 11:10
  
  +7
  
  Not in NSW, I've noticed rent keeps dropping
  - MorriJ on 07/03/2021 - 14:44
    
    +6
    
    Apparently its hard to find rentals at moment - finish your renovation, then just advertise it , get new tenants and move on
    
    I suspect he meant:
    
    Apparently its hard to find renters at moment - finish your renovation, then just advertise it , get new tenants and move on
    
    And yes, as you say with prices dropping, it is hard to find decent renters.
  - netjock on 08/03/2021 - 00:02
    
    +2
    
    Oh dear. With house prices keep on going up. The ATO will be asking what is going on with negative gearing costs going up.
    - cameldownunder on 08/03/2021 - 08:24
      
      +6
      
      Time to remove them ! ( negative gearing )
      - netjock on 08/03/2021 - 10:44
        
        @cameldownunder: Negative gearing is there to suck everyone else in. I can see the bill shock people are going to have.
      - jv on 09/03/2021 - 13:15
        
        +1
        
        @cameldownunder:
        
        Time to remove them !
        
        Why?
        
        cameldownunder on 09/03/2021 - 15:47
        
        +1
        
        @jv: So people with money ( properties ) can pay more taxes.
        
        jv on 09/03/2021 - 15:56
        
        -4
        
        @cameldownunder: They already pay more taxes…
        
        JohnHowardsEyebrows on 09/03/2021 - 17:10
        
        +1
        
        @jv: No, they don't. They reduce their taxable income often to below $80k, despite being high income earners. They're parasites.
        
        jv on 09/03/2021 - 17:13
        
        -3
        
        @JohnHowardsEyebrows:
        
        They reduce their taxable income often to below $80k
        
        and how do they 'reduce' their tax ????
        
        JohnHowardsEyebrows on 09/03/2021 - 17:54
        
        +7
        
        @jv: By claiming deductions on properties they greedily bought despite being uneconomic investments. Essentially they are stealing from honest taxpayers.
        
        Drakesy on 09/03/2021 - 18:19
        
        @JohnHowardsEyebrows: Socialising the losses some would say.
        
        And when they hold for 10 years and the properties finally made a capital gain they've effectively saved themselves 10 years of free tax deductions.
        
        Duckie2hh on 10/03/2021 - 13:36
        
        @JohnHowardsEyebrows: Someone is salty AF for missing out on a property at the last weekend's auctions…
        
        MrFrugalSpend on 10/03/2021 - 08:46
        
        +2
        
        @jv: how does it reduce tax? Just google negative gearing - that's the whole point:
        
        Negative gearing is a form of financial leverage whereby an investor borrows money to acquire an income-producing investment and the gross income generated by the investment (at least in the short term) is less than the cost of owning and managing the investment, including depreciation and interest charged on the loan.
        
        Negative gearing works because your tax bill is reduced by an amount equal to your effective marginal tax rate, multiplied by the excess of deductible expenses over investment income – that is, the tax loss on your property
        
        This is why most financial advisors who were approached for ideas on how to legally 'minimise' taxes used to tell everyone to buy rental houses for the last few decades and it became a popular thing… and that's why they should have been reforming it so that in future you can only offset your property losses against property rental income (and maybe other investment dividends), not to reduce the tax you pay on your salary… the way it always should have been.
        Essentially people are buying based on speculative capital growth, and getting fiscal support for this loss making endeavour from other taxpayers by reducing their personal income tax, and only if and when they realise a big capital gain later do they pay some tax. I know people who have done it for decades and never realise the gain.
        
        Policymakers fear upsetting the housing market so won't get rid of it - but it shouldn't exist.
        
        jv on 10/03/2021 - 08:49
        
        -3
        
        @MrFrugalSpend:
        
        how does it reduce tax? Just google negative gearing
        
        I have.
        You still have to pay the same tax on your profit….
        
        serpserpserp on 10/03/2021 - 09:57
        
        @jv: I get where you are going with this jv. I think a lot of people lump all investment property tax deductions in with the "negative gearing" slogan they hear at the BBQ. Sure you can get some tax deductions via negative gearing the will work out in a couple of circumstances. But the really good deductions are made via renovations that are deemed "repairs".
        
        Or you just reno the place, claim your depreciation until you are ready to live in it for 12 months then flog it off for a nice tax free gain.
        
        jv on 10/03/2021 - 10:07
        
        +2
        
        @serpserpserp:
        
        Sure you can get some tax deductions via negative gearing
        
        I don't see how?
        
        You pay tax on profits that you make.
        Expenses are deductible from earnings…
        
        All that negative gearing means is that your expenses are greater than earnings for that investment…
        
        That isn't a tax deduction.
        
        serpserpserp on 10/03/2021 - 11:30
        
        +1
        
        @jv:
        
        You pay tax on profits that you make
        
        No you pay tax on your taxable income.
        
        jv on 10/03/2021 - 11:32
        
        -2
        
        @serpserpserp:
        
        No you pay tax on your taxable income.
        
        Exactly, so there are no tax deductions for negative gearing…
        
        AustriaBargain on 10/03/2021 - 08:58
        
        @MrFrugalSpend: Tax funded gambling.
        
        jv on 10/03/2021 - 10:09
        
        @AustriaBargain:
        
        Tax funded gambling.
        
        Are you referring to Crown Casino?
        
        brendanm on 10/03/2021 - 20:04
        
        @jv: That's tax funded money laundering.
        
        hamwhisperer on 10/03/2021 - 21:38
        
        +1
        
        @jv: Amazing, this dude doesn't know shit about negative gearing.
        
        cameldownunder on 10/03/2021 - 17:04
        
        +1
        
        @jv: Nope, with negative gearing some don't pay taxes at all.
        
        jv on 10/03/2021 - 22:19
        
        @cameldownunder:
        
        Nope, with negative gearing some don't pay taxes at all.
        
        That would be because their expenses exceeded their income…
        
        That applies to all tax payers, not just those with property.
        
        MrFrugalSpend on 10/03/2021 - 22:33
        
        @jv: If you have nothing but expenses, but don't earn anything - the ATO doesn't send you a cheque.
        
        Negative gearing allows one asset type (i.e. an investment in property) to be offset against your salary earnings.
        The original idea was okayish, but unfortunately people abuse it and its artificially skewed the housing / rental market over time which makes it hard to undo.
        It became the 'done thing' to buy houses and spend a heap on them as "Repairs and Maintenance", finance costs, outgoings etc - some of it not justified without any care that it isn't a logical investment in its own right for rental income to minimise tax. People do it as they pump money into it on the proviso it will increase in capital value over time at a greater rate. The main bonus being, they are effectively deferring tax until they realise that gain, if at all.
        It's not a logical way to structure the tax system.
        
        As for your comment that
        
        "I have.
        You still have to pay the same tax on your profit…."
        
        … in that case, you pay a different amount on your income from ordinary salary earnings: An unfair lower amount… especially if you never pay the equivalent in capital gains tax (which is unlikely), especially if interest was factored in for the often excessive delay. Additionally, the tax rates and what infrastructure and services can be provided by the government are always evolving. If more taxes were paid by people as they didn't get to reduce their income tax by negative gearing, we'd either have more services/infrastructure, less deficit for our children, or tax cuts. So no, you aren't pulling your weight evenly.
  - Scrooge McGoose on 10/03/2021 - 07:23
    
    Where in NSW?
    
    Rentals in the central coast, Lake Mac, and New Castle can get people offering more than the asking price.
    - deme on 10/03/2021 - 08:45
      
      Sydney
    - serpserpserp on 10/03/2021 - 09:58
      
      Lake Mac is booming for retirees and unhappy commuters.
- snooksy on 08/03/2021 - 07:55
  
  +79
  
  Agreed, you gave them 90 days to vacate the property. They vacated in 30 days. Quicker so you can start your renovation which would normally be a positive for you. You can’t expect them to turn down another rental place to stay in your place for another month when they then have to hope to find another place. It sounds like you don’t have enough money to cover the mortgage repayments and do the maintenance work to the property. That is your problem, not the tenants you asked to move out. You kicked them out and they left. Boohoo for you.
FizzBalls on 07/03/2021 - 10:39

+22

Sounds like your wish was granted. It could been alot worse, I guess you can make those changes to your property in this time you have. Call bikies.
whooah1979 on 07/03/2021 - 10:42

+17

Investing in appreciating assets carry a certain amount of risk. Gains and losses are part of the game.

Do we have any recourse? The bond is still with NSW Fair-Trading BTW.>

Op, you may try and fight for the bond or take the lost rent as a lesson in investing.

Chasing losses isn't worth the headache.
- deme on 07/03/2021 - 11:13
  
  What about Bitcoin? I thought that only goes up?
  
  What can OP possibly get the bond for?
  - whooah1979 on 07/03/2021 - 11:26
    
    +4
    
    What can OP possibly get the bond for?
    
    The landlord may claim damage to the property on the exit report.
    https://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/housing-and-property/rent…
    
    At the end of the tenancy, the landlord or agent and the tenant must carry out a final inspection of the property.
    
    The original condition reports should be completed by the landlord or agent, and the tenant.
    
    The landlord or agent must give the tenant a reasonable opportunity to attend the final inspection.
    
    However, if the other party does not show up, the report may be filled out without them.
    
    The landlord may claim unpaid rent.
    
    Bond refund or claim
    A tenant must pay the rent up to and including the day their termination notice period ends and they vacate the property.
    
    If a tenant does not owe the landlord money at the end of their tenancy and there is no damage to the property, the bond paid at the beginning of the tenancy should be refunded in full.
    
    f the landlord or agent believes the tenant owes money, they can make a claim against the bond
    - deme on 07/03/2021 - 11:27
      
      +3
      
      If a tenant does not owe the landlord money at the end of their tenancy and there is no damage to the property, the bond paid at the beginning of the tenancy should be refunded in full.
      
      So nothing
      - whooah1979 on 07/03/2021 - 11:33
        
        +6
        
        @deme:
        
        They then informed us (rather gleefully) they would not be paying any more rent
        
        It sounds like the tenant skipped without paying the outstanding rent. OP can clarify how much the tenant owes.
        
        deme on 07/03/2021 - 11:34
        
        +3
        
        @whooah1979: Outstanding or OP expected them to keep paying even after they left?
        
        dizzle on 07/03/2021 - 11:42
        
        +7
        
        @whooah1979: The way I read it was they are paid up to the time they left, and will pay no more.
      - [Deactivated] on 07/03/2021 - 13:52
        
        +7
        
        @deme:
        
        So nothing
        
        You conveniently skipped over this part though
        
        A tenant must pay the rent up to and including the day their termination notice period ends
        
        Although, if I was in OPs shoes I'd be happy.
        
        Start making the changes to the property early.
        
        deme on 07/03/2021 - 13:56
        
        +1
        
        @[Deactivated]: Landlord gave notice of 90 days. They said no /more/ rent will be paid. Not they won't pay owning rent.
        
        [Deactivated] on 08/03/2021 - 00:51 Comment score below threshold.
        
        MorriJ on 08/03/2021 - 01:41
        
        +168
        
        @[Deactivated]:
        
        Month to Month doesn't just allow you to bugger off whenever you feel like it.
        
        Yes it does; they have been served a termination notice; they can bugger off whenever they feel like it.
        
        Need to refer to the tenancy agreement and state laws.
        
        Sure, let's do that; NSW legislation -> Residential Tenancies Act 2010 No 42
        
        https://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current…
        
        When we go there, we want to look at the Terminations section; it's long, but Part 5 [Terminations] -> Division 6 Miscellaneous covers what we want. We know its a periodic agreement; not a fixed term agreement.
        
        Division 6 Miscellaneous
        110 Tenant may vacate at any time before termination date specified by landlord
        (1) A tenant who is given a termination notice by the landlord, or who gives a termination notice, may give vacant possession of the residential premises at any time before the termination date.
        (2) If a termination notice is given by a landlord, the tenant is not liable to pay any rent for any period after the tenant gives vacant possession of the residential premises and before the termination date.
        (3) Subsection (2) does not affect the liability of a tenant under a fixed term agreement to pay rent in respect of a period after the tenant gives vacant possession of the residential premises and before the end of the fixed term, if the termination notice is given by the landlord in accordance with section 84.
        
        The tenant does not have to pay anything past vacating date if served the termination notice by the landlord. I would presume most landlords would be made aware of it?
        
        buckster on 08/03/2021 - 07:31
        
        +21
        
        @MorriJ: Here's the MVP
        
        cameldownunder on 08/03/2021 - 08:27
        
        @MorriJ: Good inspector work there.
        
        surg3on on 08/03/2021 - 11:08
        
        +9
        
        @MorriJ: With legislation quotes. Mmm thats my kind of justice pr0n
        
        brad1-8tsi on 08/03/2021 - 15:36
        
        +2
        
        @MorriJ: Don't let the actual rules get in the way of incorrect opinion. :-)
        
        Nice work MorriJ
        
        [Deactivated] on 08/03/2021 - 18:07
        
        -8
        
        @MorriJ: You misunderstood what I said.
        
        What I said was, being month to month does not give them the right to bugger of whenever they feel like it. Which is what @deme said they could do.
        
        Obviously, the situation here is that the LL gave a termination notice, and they didn't just bugger off because they were month to month.
        
        Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 08/03/2021 - 20:06
        
        +4
        
        @MorriJ: Landlords knowing tenancy laws? lol funny one ;)
        
        SlickMick on 08/03/2021 - 08:37
        
        -2
        
        @[Deactivated]: I was going to comment above "finally someone giving the facts - tenant is liable for rent up until notice date" and this guy is still arguing around the point.
        
        [Deactivated] on 08/03/2021 - 18:07
        
        @SlickMick: Not really, they are not.
        
        sovereign01 on 09/03/2021 - 09:19
        
        @[Deactivated]: I believe that line applies to a termination notice given to a landlord, not the other way around.
trongy on 07/03/2021 - 10:43

+124

You asked your tenants to leave and they left. Isn't that a win-win situation?.

Reading between the lines of your story it sounds like your tenants had bad landlords and they did well to get out.
- usmanyousaf on 08/03/2021 - 00:48
  
  +27
  
  what he meant to say…He has been fair to them by giving them 90 day notice…but the tenant have not. He should have left on 89th day of the eviction notice and remain fair to him(owner)
  - ThithLord on 08/03/2021 - 09:26
    
    +10
    
    I'm assuming you're being facetious so I gave you an upvote.
    - highdealer on 08/03/2021 - 12:51
      
      +1
      
      I thought that was pretty obvious, but i guess 5 people missed it.
  - nikey2k27 on 08/03/2021 - 11:05
    
    better to leave once you have found another place other wise you can end up with stay of eviction that not win win
- N1NJ4W4RR10R on 10/03/2021 - 19:34
  
  I normally like to assume the OP is the nice guy. But booting someone out during a time when the employment market is shot for the sake of renovations? Little hard to see how they would be the good guys here.
  
  Could the tenants have been curtious? Sure. But I wouldn't have been particularly curtious in this circumstance either Tbh.
Quantumcat on 07/03/2021 - 10:49

+19

This is why you use real estate agents. Probably they have to give two weeks notice if leaving during your notice period. But if you don't know what you're doing (or what their obligations are) it is going to be hard to get them to pay.
- MorriJ on 08/03/2021 - 01:49
  
  +37
  
  The tenant only needs to pay rent up until the date they vacate under NSW legislation if served a notice to terminate by the landlord.
  
  Paying a real estate agent would only mean the landlord would have been warned of this before serving the notice.
  
  Source: NSW Legislation https://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current…
  Source: Mandatory rental sheet fact provided to renters: https://files.tenants.org.au/factsheets/fs10.pdf
  - Quantumcat on 08/03/2021 - 09:12
    
    +1
    
    Thanks! Yep got that information through lots of replies.
  - stumo on 08/03/2021 - 10:48
    
    +8
    
    In VIC the tenant has to give "counter notice" of 14days. I like the NSW laws better.
    - dizzle on 08/03/2021 - 11:13
      
      +2
      
      I had a look at that out of curiosity and also found this interesting in VIC.
      
      On a periodic lease LL must give 120days notice to leave if there is no reason.
      LL can give 60 days notice for limited reasons (like family moving in or renovations that need the home empty), but then they can't lease out the house again for 6 months.
      - rohichan on 09/03/2021 - 13:11
        
        -1
        
        @dizzle: I'm in VIC and I was in a similar situation. Was given 60day notice to vacate as the LL's family was moving in but the agent told me if I found a place before 60 days (say for example, 40th day), I still had to pay the rental for the remainder of the notice. Very weird if such a rule exists! Anyway I managed to find a house closer to that 60th day without much overlap, so it did not matter in the end.
        
        dizzle on 09/03/2021 - 20:27
        
        +3
        
        @rohichan: Yeah, best not to beleive everything you get told by the agent (not all of them are bad like some think, but they are working for the Landlord). You could still have given 14 days notice to leave after receiving their 60day notice.
        
        polstralian on 10/03/2021 - 10:03
        
        @rohichan: You should have responded to the 60 day notice with your 14 days notice and this would allow to stop paying rent earlier.
        
        rohichan on 10/03/2021 - 18:15
        
        @polstralian: some lessons learnt. But one other point in my case was that I was on a 12 month lease and this notice to vacate came in the 10th month. The agent told me that If I moved out earlier to 60 day notice, it was in breach of the 12 month lease!
        
        ozhunter on 10/03/2021 - 19:24
        
        @rohichan: Well, duh.
        
        Just because he tells you in advance that they aren't going to form a new contract once this current one is over, doesn't mean you can jump ship at any time.
        
        came in the 10th month
        
        Depend on the state, he could have only given you 30 days notice if he wanted.
brendanm on 07/03/2021 - 10:50

+78

Sounds like you were constantly in the place and they just wanted to live in peace. You then asked them to move out, so they did.

Tenants don't want to be living in a place while you are renovating it, how is that fair to them? Now you can renovate to your hearts content.
- parsimonious one on 08/03/2021 - 19:00
  
  +15
  
  Yep.
  
  Sounds like OP was just using the renovation as a weak excuse to evict.
  
  “ Now we have an vacant property and we haven't even started to look for new tenants because we had more than 30 days to go until the 90 day notice period”
  
  No mention of renovations there.
  
  If the renovation was really valid they’d just get on with it and start looking for new tenant
  - Headless on 09/03/2021 - 12:15
    
    Can OP still get tax back on renovations if the property is vacant?
    - Charmoffensive on 09/03/2021 - 16:01
      
      +1
      
      As long as they're making money on rent that financial year, yeah.
  - N1NJ4W4RR10R on 10/03/2021 - 19:39
    
    Huh, I hadn't even noticed that. Not much logic in finding someone for 4 weeks, so must've been a BS reason.
JIMB0 on 07/03/2021 - 10:50

+41

I'd be moving out as well if the landlord wanted to come around all the time and perform DIY renovations. Unless urgent, these sort of things are best done when the property is vacant in-between tenants.
- fusion17 on 08/03/2021 - 18:07
  
  +7
  
  Guessing the idea was to renovate while still getting rent, then once the 90days is up its on the market freshly Reno'd at higher rent. Or for family etc to move into.
  
  Essentially they want rent while renovating, not an empty unit.
robbyjones on 07/03/2021 - 10:54

+80

They don't have to give you notice to move out once you have given them a notice to vacate, they can move out any time in the 90 days, without penalty, they only have to pay rent up until they move out.
- nickj on 08/03/2021 - 14:42
  
  +38
  
  Exactly. I've done the same thing (been given 90 days no fault notice, because owners wanted to renovate after a burst water pipe ruined the floor and caused a mould problem). And I too was gleeful about handing the keys back early (on the inside, but on the outside I was a poker face). I gave no warning whatsoever I was leaving 45 days earlier, nor should I have to - in NSW, the law is crystal clear - you can leave any time before the 90 days and you only pay rent up to the day you leave & hand back the keys. And I think this is eminently fair too - we were faultless tenants (took great care of the place and always paid in advance, the pipe burst because it got old and rusty and the landlord didn't spend $1 on preventative maintenance), then I got a whole lot of words from the agent in the months after the burst pipe like "oh we'll work with you and treat you well to get this burst pipe fixed, don't worry, it will be fine" (all of which turned out to be lies), followed by zero notice or forewarning of the eviction notice, or even a phone call or a heads up, just a letter at the start of December full of legalese telling us to get out before a date 90 days in the future, so I had to frantically scramble over many weekends to find a new place that we liked (at a time when most agencies are shutting down for the holiday period), eventually we found one, applied, got ignored by that agent, call that agent, find out they no longer had the property and had been just wasting our time, find the same place advertised again with a new agency, apply again for the exact same place, get accepted, sign the lease paperwork, organize removalists, pay removalists, pay moving fee to strata at old place for exclusive use of the lift, organise use of lift at the new place, pack everything up which takes forever, unpack everything at the other end which is also slow, finalise electricity/gas/internet/contents insurance, organise new electricity/gas/internet/contents insurance at the new place, tell lots of people and companies our new address, and so forth - and most of that happened over & took up what would otherwise have been our relaxing Christmas / January break. It was stressful and unpredictable and expensive, and not at a time of our choosing, and it was no fun at all. So the glee part comes from being able to reciprocate those joys right back onto the very people who caused them in the first place, and no longer having to pay a single cent to those people. And in the case of our old place, the renovation took way longer than they had predicted (before evicting us the agent had estimated it would take 4 to 6 weeks and had even asked if we wanted to take a long holiday and come back to it all fixed, but it actually took them 6 months from when we left to when they could advertise it for rent again, so in hindsight they did us a favour, although it certainly did not feel like it at the time). And no, you have no recourse, because they did nothing wrong (legally or morally). They have zero obligation to tell you their move out dates, when you have told them to get out asap. If you cannot deal with those consequences, then do not hand out eviction notices.
  - fishing on 08/03/2021 - 15:23
    
    +19
    
    So succinct!
    
    This is what landlords and every other observer in the landlord vs tenant sport do not understand
    
    Moving is very stressful, very expensive and ruins any ability to take annual leave for an actual holiday
    
    And the ignoramus' that say, "well stop moving all the time", if you are at the lower end of the market, knock down rebuilds happen ALL the time. I reckon on average over the past 20 years we have had 10 different addresses and only one of those was by our choice!
  - ThadtheChad on 10/03/2021 - 13:44
    
    +1
    
    Wow very well put.
    
    I've moved a fair bit, and I can sympathise. Moving houses is an absolutely pain in the bollocks and your detailed description gave me PTSD. :D
iNeed2Pee on 07/03/2021 - 11:01

+21

So you gave them 90 days to move out.

Were you expecting them to move out on the 89th or 90th day?

I am not too sure you will get the answer you want out of this post.
deme on 07/03/2021 - 11:06

+74
Your one sided story makes you look like an ass hat.

On Friday a moving truck arrives to our surprise, and later that day the tenants hand back keys to us.

Why are you spying on them?

They then informed us (rather gleefully) they would not be paying any more rent - like they got one over on us.

OP tells them to gtfo

They gtfo

OP: why aren't you paying me money?
- Zephyrus on 07/03/2021 - 11:28
  
  On Friday a moving truck arrives to our surprise
  
  I assume they live nearby. People often like to buy investment properties that are in the same apartment complex or neigbours, so it could have been just looking out the window and seeing a moving truck
  - stumo on 08/03/2021 - 10:50
    
    +6
    
    Which is terrible investment strategy.
    - smalltime0 on 08/03/2021 - 16:21
      
      Sometimes you just end up with the property.
      
      I know someone that lives across the road from their landlord.
      They bought it for one of his friends to live in whilst at uni/post uni (its right near a strain station), had it for about 10 years, then their daughter accepted a job in Melbourne.
      It was a smaller house than what the landlord lives in, and I presume they are going to retire into it eventually and sell their current house.
    - cfuse on 08/03/2021 - 17:30
      
      +11
      
      And an even worse life choice.
      
      I've seen this behaviour multiple times, the life invading landlord. They're always miserable and unreasonable people that treat you like you're living in their spare bedroom for free instead of giving them hundreds of dollars a week for a completely separate property in a contractual agreement.
brokenglish on 07/03/2021 - 11:07

+21

This is gold.
- HeyHeyHeyIsItADeal on 07/03/2021 - 23:41
  
  +3
  
  yeah im not sure if OP is (profanity) serious. Jeezus.
obit11 on 07/03/2021 - 11:21

+24

AITA? Are you the (profanity)? Yes you are.
oscargamer on 07/03/2021 - 11:22

+16

Bond can only be claimed for damages, not unpaid rent.

You served notice for them to leave. They left. What's the issue?

As already said, you sound like a PITA landlord.
- smalltime0 on 08/03/2021 - 16:22
  
  If they had unpaid rent, the landlord absolutely can claim it from the Bond.
  But from the sound of things, they paid up until they left.

Tenants Have Handed Back Possession Early during 90 Day Notice Period

closed Comments

New Forum Topics