taking over a property before the 42 days notice

[ak22]

Hi all.

I'm taking over a property soon. My first investment property. Vendor has given 42 days notice to current tenants. Now, i would like to settle before the 42 weeks notice.

What are the pros and cons of doing this?

I want the current tenants to stay as long as they want. Vendor said tenants have been living there for the past 10 years and paid on time. I want to increase the rent just to make it around the current rental price. This will trigger a 10% increase on their weekly rent.

Also, if tenancy with me starts on the settlement date, will that be legally possible even if 42 days notice isn't up yet?

Cheers.

[cesami20]

If you want to keep tenants I would make new agreement.

[ak22]

Thanks cesami20.

That's what i plan to do.

Do you think the start date for tenancy will be the day after the settlement?

cheers

[Happi]

Thanks cesami20.

That's what i plan to do.

Do you think the start date for tenancy will be the day after the settlement?

cheers

There are too many complications with an "inherited" tenant. I would suggest you only accept possession without a tenant. Specially if you are a new naive landlord.

Some issues are...
Bond.
New tenancy contract.
Property inspection report (proof of damage to property) before/after possession.

Getting a new tenant can reduce your complexities. A property agent can be helpful too. Unless you want to learn to be a great landlord, then you should study the RTA and start with your choice of tenant.

Good luck, it's great to be alive with all of these privileges that we enjoy!

Happi

[Bobsyouruncle]

PRetty simple really. Get the tenants on a new tenancy agreement and keep them. Just don't settle until they are on the new tenancy.

[Arpoo]

Hi all.

I'm taking over a property soon. My first investment property. Vendor has given 42 days notice to current tenants. Now, i would like to settle before the 42 weeks notice.

What are the pros and cons of doing this?

I want the current tenants to stay as long as they want. Vendor said tenants have been living there for the past 10 years and paid on time. I want to increase the rent just to make it around the current rental price. This will trigger a 10% increase on their weekly rent.

Also, if tenancy with me starts on the settlement date, will that be legally possible even if 42 days notice isn't up yet?

Cheers.

I would talk to a property manager about this. There's a lot of complications that can arise such Tribunal can say that the original agreement still apply even though you have signed a new agreement + you will be inheriting what most likely is much smaller amount of bond + tenants may object to doing 3 monthly because the vendor could be doing less frequent inspection, etc, etc.

PM if you will like to know which property manager to talk to.

Cheers.

[Keys]

tenants may object to doing 3 monthly because the vendor could be doing less frequent inspection,

Ummm. Why is this an issue?

[flyernzl]

I have been in exactly this position.

The way to go about it:
- sign the S&P 'with vacant possession' - it is then up to the vendors to sort out the tenant issue.
- go and see the existing tenant. Talk to them. Say you are quite willing to take them on in a new tenancy, starting from the day you purchase the property, providing that the new rent from that date is $xxx
- if that all works, sign them up with your new tenancy form, which will include all your own terms and conditions (the old ones from the previous landlord are irrelevant to you).
On the day of settlement, go to the property and carry out a full property inspection with the tenant present, so you both agree on the condition of the property at the start of the new tenancy.
- don't forget to sort out a new bond.

[Bobsyouruncle]

tenants may object to doing 3 monthly because the vendor could be doing less frequent inspection, etc, etc.

As you will be uninsured if you don't have those inspections your tenants have no choice.