Hi, I'm a tenant and our agency has advised that they will be switching to "Simple Rent" for weekly rent payments from next week.
The simple rent charges $1.25 per transaction, how do you avoid this? Is this even legal in NSW?
I found the below information on NSW Legislation website.
Is someone going through the same thing and can provide any insights on this?
Can REA force you to use this method?
You literally posted the info saying they can't. Have you asked them for another method and pointed out the legislation to them if they've said that's the only option?
They have said we can't comment on this at the moment. Once the payments start from next week then we will be able to comment further.
@StraightGuy: I'd be fighting it, but also be looking into your rights re unfair evictions and document all correspondance, in case it doesn't end well.
You provided the legislation that stated they need to provide a fee-free method to pay.
You should enquire with the REA which method to use to avoid paying a fee.
They will likely try to skirt around this fact, but the legislation is right there. Good luck!
They said we can't comment on this at the moment, once the payments start from next week then we will be able to comment further.
Looks like a loose loose situation to me.
Just inform them that you'll keep paying by the same method you already do.
Time to tighten things up then.
Or even lose lose.
As others have said, they are obliged to offer an alternative form of payment.
Just ask them ifcthey orefer cashbor direct debit/credit.
Then until they do comment and provide said method you simple continue as per previous or arrange with the REA of how they will refund the fees to you to stay compliant with the laws.
They will say that the method is "cash every week at their office" which is legal.
That's a pain for them, too
See who calls the bluff then :D
The office is on my way, I don't mind :D
Pay in $5ers (can't pay in coins, they don't legally have to accept that)
They also don’t legally have to accept $5 notes either. If you have a $550/week rent and go in there being a smart arse with 110x$5 notes, they can just tell you to go away and they won’t accept it.
If the only fee free way to pay is via cash, then they legally have to accept all legal tenders, which includes $5 notes.
If they don't accept any cash payments, then they need a way for the OP to pay without a fee as per the law.
@pegaxs: For all the neggers out there and all the “bUt cAsH iS KiNg!!1 iT’s tHe LaW!11” pundits, the ACCC says…
Businesses don’t have to accept cash.
They can also put a “handling fee” on cash in person transactions to cover any excessive consumed time/handling it takes to process the cash and take it to the bank for deposit.
The caveat here is that if a business does charge any fees for payments, it must be clearly displayed before paying and/or itemised on the price of the goods.
The REA only has to have “A” fee free option, it does “NOT” have to be cash. Their “fee free” option may be direct deposit or some other method of payment (BPay, PostPay, Poli, bags of rice or bananas if they choose, whatever). REA’s are free to decline cash payments or to put a fee on cash payments if they have an alternative “fee free” way to pay and they also let you know upfront that there is a fee to handle cash payments.
So, cry harder.
@pegaxs: The point is they legally have to provide a fee free way to pay.
What’s the point in ranting about something where someone is suggesting to pay by cash.
The caveat here is that if a business does charge any fees for payments, it must be clearly displayed before paying and/or itemised on the price of the goods.
Not correct for rent payments.
If the real estate turn around and say payment can only be made in cash to make it inconvenient, it still must be fee free.
Op literally posted the legislation.
The point is they legally have to provide a fee free way to pay.
I am not disputing that part, I even reiterated when I said that the REA has to have "A", (as in singular) method of payment that is fee free. I does NOT have to be "cash" (As outlined by the ACCC).
…where someone is suggesting to pay by cash.
Because the REA doesn't "HAVE" to accept cash. There is no legal requirement for ANY business to accept cash as a form of payment. Outside of REA's, most other businesses don't even have to supply a "fee free" way to pay. I was merely pointing out that "legal tender" doesn't mean what people think it means. It's not some kind of "gotcha!!" to force a business to accept cash…
Not correct for rent payments.
Yes, correct, even for rent payments. "IF" there is a fee associated with "ANY" method of payment, the customer must be notified of it "BEFORE" making payment. You cant take a rent payment payment for $550 and jam a $x fee on it without telling the person paying the rent. This "fee" must be disclosed BEFORE settling the payment. In the case of REA's, if the person refuses this method of payment, the REA must offer an alternative payment method that does not incur this fee… (and again, for the hard of reading, this "fee free" option does NOT have to be "cash").
If the real estate turn around and say payment can only be made in cash to make it inconvenient, it still must be fee free.
IF cash is their ONLY method of accepting payment, then yes, it must be "fee free". If they have an alternative payment method (Poli/direct deposit/direct debit/B-Pay/whatever) and that method is "fee free" then yes, they can put a fee on cash transactions or not even accept cash at all.
Op literally posted the legislation.
And again, I'll just put you in the basket of people that dont read my replies and just see the negs and use it as a pile on to make inane comments. I have already reiterated that I concur with the legislation. This is not in dispute. I agree with that part. There has to be at least one form of "fee free" payment method available to renters… What I disagree with is that "cash" is the only fee free method or that the REA has to accept it based on "iT'z LeGaL tEnDeR!1!!"
The legislation says that the REA has an obligation to offer art least "ONE" form of payment method that is "fee free". The legislation does not stipulate that this "fee free" method "HAS" to be in the form of "CASH". I pointed out that turning up with 110 x $5 notes is no guarantee that they will accept payment via this method without a fee IF they have some other method of making payment that is "fee free".
I am happy for you to read though the NSW Residential Tenancies Act and point out the part where it says that the "fee free" option MUST be cash…
The REA only has to have “A” fee free option, it does “NOT” have to be cash. Their “fee free” option may be direct deposit or some other method of payment (BPay, PostPay, Poli, bags of rice or bananas if they choose, whatever). REA’s are free to decline cash payments or to put a fee on cash payments if they have an alternative “fee free” way to pay and they also let you know upfront that there is a fee to handle cash payments.
This comment thread was talking about cash, and you were specifically talking about cash, now you're not?
So, cry harder.
You seem to be the only one getting upset by this. Given your history, I can see why.
@pegaxs: There are specific laws stating a certain amount of coins and over does not need to be accepted as legal tender - I am unaware of anything relating to bank notes.
There are specific laws stating a certain amount of coins and over does not need to be accepted as legal tender
Correct, it is located here (Currency Act 1965: Rule 16) But on that, I didn't mention coins. So I dont know why you are attributing that comment to me. I never disputed that.
I am unaware of anything relating to bank notes.
Again, I am not stating that it does. To my knowledge, nothing exists for bank notes in similar way to which coins operate. What there is though, is the right to "refuse" to accept cash as a form of payment. The caveat to this is that the business must notify potential customers of their non-acceptance of cash by verbal or visible means and they must provide other forms of payment (EFT/Credit card/direct deposit/etc…) and in the case of REA's, at least one of these "alternative" payment methods needs to be fee free, but it doesnt have to be "cash".
From the ACCC webite regarding "cash" transactions;
- Businesses don’t have to accept cash.
Cash
Businesses can choose which payment types they accept. It is legal for a business to specify the terms and conditions that they will supply goods and services. This includes whether they will accept cash payment. However, consumers must be made aware of these terms and conditions before they make a purchase.Businesses should be clear and upfront about the types of payments they accept, and the total minimum price payable for their goods and services.
What I am saying is that "legal tender" isnt a catch-all "Gotcha!!" that people think it is so they can use to try and force a business to accept cash. There is a misconception that the words "legal tender" means that a business has to accept cash and they have no choice, when the actual meaning is that cash is an accepted method to settle debts, not a "forced" method.
Now OP has decided they want to pay the rent in $5 notes.
Buddy you found the information yourself, take it to the REA not OZB
Just wanted to know if someone else has been in this situation and were they able to get out of it.
Back in the day when I was renting and the REA told me they were changing to this rotting system, I said I want to continue paying by back transfer. They refused, so I found that the payment platform had a bpay account that you could pay, and it actually cost the REA to receive money that way, so that's how I paid from then on
Thanks for letting me know this option. If this has bpay then I will definitely use that.
Yep similar happened.
They payment platform i can bpay to.
but its even more fun, since the payment platform doesnt tell me when theres a waterbill; the rea has to SMS me to say a water bill is available to pay, and then i have to xfer money manually, and it costs them $1
Yes I called them out saying it was illegal. They backed down and gave me a free way to pay.
Just send an Email.
What was the fee free way for you?
I don't know why some people are in these forums just to tell posters they shouldn't post here.
Sharing is caring.
Thats how covid got spread lol
Talk to your REA and send them the link above and ask them for another payment method that doesn't have a charge.
I will send them and see what they say. Not sure if they're already aware and just don't want to comment on it
I wouldn't be using their new method at all.
I don't even want to use that either. I will keep following them and see what they say
Oh they will be aware of the requirement to offer a fee free option. That is their job. They just don't want to tell you up front, as they like this system as it makes life easier for them. Basically a few clicks from the app to send you a new lease etc, all things they change the owner bucket loads for.
They know but are just trying it on to get you to use the system.
I'd just tell them that you will not be using Simple Rent and would like to continue paying as you currently do till they provide a method that doesn't have a charge as required by NSW legislation.
Fair enough, it's sounds like a reasonable answer.
Also do it in writing; so there is a record of it.
Thanks, I will send them an email.
Their answer will be, you need to come to the REA every week/fortnight to pay rent in cash, simple as that.
Is it reasonable? not really. does it uphold the spirit of the legislation? probably. depends how far you want to take it.
That’s not an option with my rental agent. If you want to pay cash you have to go to the post office.
Still a better option than having to go see your REA every week!
Which seems silly because I bet it costs them money to receive money from the post office.
I just looked it up, $5 transaction fee!
I don't mind that, the office is on my way. The only issue would while travelling for holidays, might pay in advance then
You don't have to pay your rent weekly, you can pay it in monthly blocks if you want to or even more.
you just need to be 'ahead' in the payments. ie you can pay this week the next 4 weeks rent, then in 4 weeks time, pay the next 4 weeks etc.
So if going on holiday, prepay the rent.
Would also reduce transaction fees, if they were necessary (which they aren't inbthis scenario).
The currency act of 1965 allows you to pay any value transaction in $5 notes. Go in to the office every month with a couple of hundred $5 notes. Watch as they count it all. If they don't let you pay by bank transfer after that come back the next month with a pile of cash that is a few notes short. When they tell you its short demand they recount it several times before handing over the balance. Bonus points if the money is filthy.
That's what I'd do except I'd turn up at 4.58pm on a Fri every week.
If they don't budge, then double down by paying a months rent in a single go by $5 notes! Being a few notes short of course.
But knowing the agents, I bet they'll have a note counter ready! Honestly they should this anyhow if they are accepting cash for rent payments. They are dirt cheap and remove any issues.
How Do You Avoid Transaction Fee for Paying Weekly Property Rent to The REA
Brought a house instead…… No more REA fees!
how do you avoid this?
In all seriousness, what did your REA advise when you asked them what the fee free option to pay was? Only they will be able to advise you.
It'll be some painful thing, like bringing unmarked bills into the office that will only be accepted between 10.03am and 10.06am, on the odd number calendar days.
Brought a house instead……
Where did you bring it to?
It'll be some painful thing, like bringing unmarked bills into the office that will only be accepted between 10.03am and 10.06am, on the odd number calendar days.
fine, then underpay them by $1.25 each month, why would they bother you chasing for that then?
Property managers are dogs, and their "jobs" shouldn't be made easier at the tenants expense. If they want to use something that simplifies their book keeping, they should pay for it, just like every other business has to.
Damn straight they are! So many of their rent increases aren't even landlord driven. It's the REA chasing a bigger pay day because the more they can get you to pay in rent, the more goes back into their profit bags.
But $1.25 among the thousands of dollars in rent each month
It all adds up…. What if you pay weekly? That's $65/year.
What if they Jack the price up to $2/time and you pay weekly? $104/year.
Why should you when as you said who is paying thousands a month, have to pay a fee to give them money? Surely this should be built into the rent already.
<non-renter has entered the chat>
Yes.
if its only $1.25 then surely a REA can eat the cost far easier than the renter. hell why not short change them $5 a week, after all it is only $5 so would it really be worth the REA chasing it.
Simply add a $2.50 weekly charge for having to use Simple Rent if they can not do an automated direct debit
If you keep getting pushback, contact the office for your local member for NSW Parliament.
Housing is such a hot topic, and this would be an easy win for them this as it actually doesnt require them to do anything new or meaningful, they can just get some intern to call the REA and remind them of the law.
Thanks for this idea. It will be helpful if REA keeps on pushing to use 3rd party rent management system,
Went through this crap a few years back, agent insisting I had to use their payment app.
When I demanded a fee free option they said the only other method was a cheque.
Being the malicious compliant bastard that I am. That's what they got on rent due day every month.
Now some poor underling had to visit the back to deposit it. Did that for a year til the owner sold up and I moved on.
I'm happy to do this, if they only fee free option is this.
My Rea tried to pull the same BS. I wrote back quoting similar legislation but for QLD. They weren't too happy about it but not my problem.
Happened to us a few years ago.
- Said we wouldn't sign up for the platform
- Cited fees and concerns with the privacy policy of the platform (had read it, it leaked like a sieve)
- Asked for a fee free option
- REA said that we had to switch over
- We reiterated that we wouldn't
- Pointed out we were entitled to a fee free option
- Said I could drop off a cheque each week
- They went quiet for a few days
- Continued to pay via bank transfer
- They said that bank transfer would be fine
Thanks for letting me know. My REA has not provided any further comments at the moment, all they said was we will be able to comment once the new platform starts from next week. My concern is if I used the platform, they're not gonna provide any alternative.
Then DO NOT use it. continue to bank transfer so they can't say you weren't paying. until they provide a fee free option you are 100% in the right.
Don't use it, it'll be much easier to just say no than to do it for a week or two, wait for thier reply, then try to get out.
Making a stand like @Celorne is the best approach IMO.
(So long as your happy being in the agent's bad books. It might be the start of having to fight for your rights on other matters too.)
How are you paying at the moment? If it’s direct debit or some other automated system, don’t change anything. If the payment gets refused because the REA changes their system, you can still clearly showed you tried to pay.
Don’t sign up and start using the new platform, at all. They can’t go against the law you found (not give a fee free option) and say they’ll let you know after you start using the new platform.
However, please take mine and any others advice with a grain of salt.
I haven’t been in your situation, but I’ve read comments from many people who have (or at least say they have on the internet, r/shitrentals on reddit is full of similar stories)
Please do what is right for you. I absolutely hate to admit it, but considering the state of the rental market, is this worth being difficult to the REA over?
It very well may be, but be prepared the REA may make it more difficult to renew your lease/ advise the landlord to find an easier tenant.
For me, something like this is absolutely worth making a fuss over. But I recognise that’s very easy for me to say as I have a few safety nets/ opportunities that many may not have.
Please keep us updated, I do love hearing about a dodgy REA getting pushback
My REA tried this too. They offered a fee free option via their app which involves a new BSB and account number every week (single use only). It's tedious, but I'm not giving these crunts any more than necessary. My neighbours aren't tech savvy so they eat the fee. I'm sure the owner is unaware of bullshirt.
Their app also has "rewards" with the expected user information gathering scam. Luckily it can be ignored.
Renters say they're being 'coerced' onto third party apps like Ailo to make payments
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-08-01/third-party-rental-ho…
Landlords must allow ‘reasonable’ pet requests and provide free methods for paying rent under NSW government shake-up
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-23/nsw-pet-rental-landlo…
Still they continue…
$1.25 x 4 = $5
$5 x 20 tenants = $100
Easy $100 each month.