If you think it's scary what's proposed here, look at what's proposed in VIC:

[PonsonbyPM]

The 14 proposed changes announced in October (2017)

• Removal of the 120-day ‘no specified reason’ to vacate. Landlords to provide a reason to end a lease.
• Limit the use of ‘end of fixed term’ notices to vacate to encourage long-term leasing.
• Landlords and agents prohibited from making false, misleading or deceptive representations to induce a tenant into an agreement.
• Pre-contractual disclosure: Landlords must disclose certain information before agreement is signed including any proposal to sell property or if asbestos has been identified at the property.
• Commissioner for Residential Tenancies to be appointed.
• Landlord blacklist introduced.
• 14-day automatic bond repayment.
• Early release of bond.
• Cap bonds and upfront rent for most properties (no more than one month’s rent for a property where the weekly rent is less than double the median weekly rent).
• Faster repairs reimbursement.
• Rent can only be increased every 12 months instead of six months.
• Agents must advertise properties at a fixed price and prohibited from inviting prospective tenants to make offers at a higher price.
• Landlords cannot unreasonably refuse a tenant’s right to keep a pet.
• Renters can make minor modifications to a property.

https://www.realestatebusiness.com.au/property-management-features/16952-rental-demand-up-in-regional-victoria-as-tenancy-reforms-approach?utm_source=RealEstateBusiness&utm_campaign=07_03_18&utm_medium=email&utm_content=3

[Perry]

Where did you extract that list from?

I could not find it in the linked article.

[PonsonbyPM]

Try:

https://www.consumer.vic.gov.au/latest-news/new-reforms-designed-to-make-renting-fairer-news-alert

[Perry]

An impressive list. Almost 100% biased, as one would expect.

E.g.

a landlord and estate agent blacklist.

No tenant blacklist - of course!

Had to guffaw at this:

allowing tenants to more easily make minor modifications to the property such as installing air conditioning: a landlord will not be able to unreasonably refuse consent.

Aircon installation is minor? Yeah, right! Probably cheap, too.

Only in the land of the under-arm bowlers, perhaps?

[klauster]

Well, that isn’t all – how do you feel about a vacancy tax?
Example AU: The new tax became effective on January 1^st 2018 and is based on occupation of your property in the preceding year (2017).

[BigDreamer]

Had to guffaw at this:

Aircon installation is minor? Yeah, right! Probably cheap, too.

Only in the land of the under-arm bowlers, perhaps?

The reason concern with letting tenants perform installations such as Heatpumps or Security Lights is what would happen if the installation was faulty because it was not installed by a registered electrician? What happens if it catches fire and the tenant is injured or worse, dies? Would the landlord/property manage be liable for this given that this proposed law allowed them to make such 'minor' modifications?

[Don't believe the Hype]

Do they take it with them when they go, like they would a washing machine?

[Perry]

Hell no! Leave it behind and deduct it from the bond.
Whether the LL wants that, or not.

Besides, now you're getting practical and logical.
Those give the woodenheads migraines, so are avoided.

[Phixyt]

The reason concern with letting tenants perform installations such as Heatpumps or Security Lights is what would happen if the installation was faulty because it was not installed by a registered electrician? What happens if it catches fire and the tenant is injured or worse, dies? Would the landlord/property manage be liable for this given that this proposed law allowed them to make such 'minor' modifications?

Tenants are welcome to change their tenancy however they like in commercial so long as the landlord approves and landlords cannot unreasonably withhold approval. I've just recently had a tenant install a heatpump in their hairdresser. Very simple conditions - removed and made good or becomes landlords property at end of the lease at landlords discretion, required to be installed by registered tradesmen and a electrical CoC be issued (I also sighted the quote and checked up on the company installing), and any damages or faults caused by the installation and operation be the responsibility of the tenant.

It works in commercial, why not residential?

I have a friend in Germany who has just completely refurbished the apartment shes moved into and it looks amazing. She paid for the whole lot which she was happy to do because of the security that the German system guarantees.

Making tenants more responsible for what goes on in the property seems like a damn good idea to me. Let them have a bit more security and allow modifications but make sure they have to give it back in exactly the state they took it in.

[Perry]

Very simple conditions - removed and made good or becomes landlords property at end of the lease at landlords discretion. It works in commercial, why not residential?

Making [residential] tenants more responsible for what goes on in the property seems like a damn good idea to me. Let them have a bit more security and allow modifications but make sure they have to give it back in exactly the state they took it in.

Commercial vs residential and Germany vs New Zealand sounds like two good reasons why it would not work here, to me.

And - as with your hairdresser example - return to original state or leave behind the aircon., etc., seems reasonable.

But this is NZ and we have far too many bleeding heart do-gooders for such a thing to happen.

[Wayne]

It works in commercial, why not residential?

It will work in residential for some tenants but not all.
Different calibre of person between commercial and some residential

[Phixyt]

Commercial vs residential and Germany vs New Zealand sounds like two good reasons why it would not work here, to me.

And - as with your hairdresser example - return to original state or leave behind the aircon., etc., seems reasonable.

But this is NZ and we have far too many bleeding heart do-gooders for such a thing to happen.

I honestly believe it is all about how a proposal is framed. If you want a law changes to benefit landlords, focus completely on the benefits to tenants and don't discuss the landlords benefits.

The above tenancy law changes are clearly framed for the tenant, right?

I really don't know enough about the aussie system to frame this accurately and I'm not a PR professional but take this as a loose example:

This is the type of thing you would quietly discuss with landlord groups. Frame this as pleasing the tenants to keep things calm while pushing for better landlord rules. Taking suggestions from lobbyists and landlords in focus groups.

Removal of the 120-day ‘no specified reason’ to vacate. Landlords to provide a reason to end a lease. How many excuses can you come up with to have someone out? It doesn't state that some reasons aren't valid. Could just say you want to carry out some repairs and maintenance that require the tenant to vacate? How often is a tenant going to actually try and check what you're doing and challenge this? People don't like taking time off work to argue silly crap in tribunals.
Limit the use of ‘end of fixed term’ notices to vacate to encourage long-term leasing. Long term leasing is usually a pro right? and the 120 day no reason vacate just turns into needing a reason. I see little change there.
Landlords and agents prohibited from making false, misleading or deceptive representations to induce a tenant into an agreement. This is just obvious.
Pre-contractual disclosure: Landlords must disclose certain information before agreement is signed including any proposal to sell property or if asbestos has been identified at the property. You'd expect the same if you purchased a property or leased it. Plus it removes liability from you if they know of an issue and still accept. This is pretty prudent stuff to do anyway.
Commissioner for Residential Tenancies to be appointed. Whoopie. Another bureaucrat, right? But wait, who has the lobbying power? Landlords do. Tenants have loosely organised advocacy groups but they don't really have lobbying power so that bureaucrat will be hearing plenty from landlord advocates. Is that a bad thing?
Landlord blacklist introduced. tenants have a blacklist in NZ. TINZ. Plus, do you want those blacklisted landlords to be in your profession, bringing down the entire lot? Let the really bad ones get blacklisted and forced to sell their properties. Means less competition and better respect for the profession.
14-day automatic bond repayment. Puts the pressure on to get stuff sorted promptly, right? but you expect this of your PM. My bond turn around time was 5 days when I worked Residential. Raising a dispute within 14 days is incredibly easy. Again, this will weed out those bad operators that make the rest of us look terrible! We're the ones who discuss things with our peers, get advice, and don't bring disrepute to the profession!
Early release of bond. Get your money sooner if the tenant agrees. Definitely don't see any issue there.
Cap bonds and upfront rent for most properties (no more than one month’s rent for a property where the weekly rent is less than double the median weekly rent). We already have a 4 week cap. Are they playing catch up?
Faster repairs reimbursement. Who's to say what is and isn't urgent repairs? I don't like this one either because it's not clear. I'd lobby for clarity on what is considered urgent. Something like loss of electricity or water, I understand. I wouldn't put up with this for long before booking my own person and it has to be done no matter what. So long as they use qualified professionals and alert the PM/owner and wait an appropriate amount of time before carrying out anything themselves. I definitely think this needs clarity. There isn't any particularly good way to frame it unfortunately.
Rent can only be increased every 12 months instead of six months. Who honestly raises their rent every 6 months anyway? Quickest way to lose good tenants.
Agents must advertise properties at a fixed price and prohibited from inviting prospective tenants to make offers at a higher price. Allowing bidding wars for tenancies was a terrible idea to start with. It starts the relationship terribly. Who wants a tenant who thinks they "won" your property? What happens if they overbid and can't afford it? Agents should know the market anyway and price accordingly.
Landlords cannot unreasonably refuse a tenant’s right to keep a pet. Tenants with pets tend to be happier tenants and happier tenants cause less trouble and stay for longer. Plus what is considered unreasonable? Unreasonable is pretty hard to prove and there are plenty of excuses. I'm not sure on their laws over there regarding cleaning but I would consider it reasonable to ask the tenant to carpet clean yearly if they have a pet. Add tenancy agreement clauses as needed and this is minor and keeps the whingers happy.
Renters can make minor modifications to a property. With approval from the owner* not to be unreasonably withheld. Throw in a reinstatement clause and you'll end up with modifications that may add value or the tenant can put it back to how it was. Make it clear that the owner won't pay them back for any additions. Tenant adds a heatpump?! happy days!

[Phixyt]

It will work in residential for some tenants but not all.
Different calibre of person between commercial and some residential

Oh believe me, there are plenty of idiots in commercial as well. The difference I see is that it's much easier for the landlord to be properly compensated for a tenants stuff ups in commercial. Residential tends to let tenants off far too easily.

Commercial tenants have more responsibility, yes. I'd love to see residential tenants be given more responsibility. We need to stop dancing around the issue and make people responsible for their actions.

[Perry]

Landlord blacklist introduced. tenants have a blacklist in NZ. TINZ. Plus, do you want those blacklisted landlords to be in your profession, bringing down the entire lot? Let the really bad ones get blacklisted and forced to sell their properties. Means less competition and better respect for the profession.

The TINZ black list is not public, is it?

I suspect the LLs blacklist would be.

What would be the criteria for blacklisting?

Who would administer the list?

Duration on list?

Right of appeal?

Prosecution of malicious tenant black-listers of LLs?

[Phixyt]

The TINZ black list is not public, is it?

I suspect the LLs blacklist would be.

What would be the criteria for blacklisting?

Who would administer the list?

Duration on list?

Right of appeal?

Prosecution of malicious tenant black-listers of LLs?

A landlord blacklist would logically have to be public and in that sense, so should a tenant blacklist. The criteria for blacklisting would have to be fairly severe though.

TINZ shows any tribunal activity whether they took a landlord to tribunal or were taken themselves. That form of blacklist isn't clear and you'd have too many disputes and appeals against it.

If anyone could just load up a bunch of crap about their landlord, the blacklist would be worthless. I'd bet that it will only be for the worst of the worst and I'd hope it would require a tribunal order from the adjudicator to blacklist a landlord. The logical organisation to administer it would be Australian Tenancy Tribunal.

I'd expect rights to appeal and a reasonable duration.

There would be a ton of queries to go through when forming something like this but I'd expect a blacklist to only apply to the most serious offenders and still allow a pathway back.