Help with breaking rental lease.

Forums › Off topic › Help with breaking rental lease.

1 | 2

Byrned

455 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 27

#517465 6-Sep-2011 12:56

mrchillie: The reply from my property manager this morning left me quite angry and upset.
Apparently to break my lease I need to pay $89 for advertising, $50 for new photos, $30 for credit check of the new tenant AND $300 Quinovic fee, what ever that is.
NONE of this is mentioned on any agreement I signed.

First of all congrats on buying the house.

Sorry, I have to take the landlords/property managers view on this. It might not be mentioned in the agreement, but the agreement that you signed was a fixed term.

So, the option remains is that you pay the rent until the property managers find a new tennant, and pay the costs of this, or find the new tennant and then let the property managers decide whether or not they accept your new tennant.

Note that either option will require them to spend time doing reference checks, writing contracts etc etc, which is what the Quinovic fee is for.

alasta

6889 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3363

Trusted

Subscriber

#517469 6-Sep-2011 13:03

I'd really like to see the Residential Tenacies Act amended to provide an out clause with a pre-determined penalty for breaking the fixed term. It's understandable that tenants may suffer a change in circumstances, but it's also undertandable that landlords don't expect to incur costs for a breach of contract on the other side. Things have a tendency to get very messy in situations like this.

mrchillie

53 posts

Master Geek

#517475 6-Sep-2011 13:13

I sat down with the property manager today and got a clear run down of costs. The Quinovic fee is indeed used for the administration involved with finding someone new. In the end I gave up and agreed to the charges. Sorting out the other things with the new house is taking enough of my time as it is anyway.

Cant fight the system right?

trig42

5889 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2094

ID Verified

#517476 6-Sep-2011 13:14

Hopefully Quinovic will be charging you the $300 fee so that they can get someone in there who doesn't need to pay the fee, therefore making it an attractive rental and hopefully quicker.

It is in Quinovic's interests as the Landlord's agent to get the place re-let ASAP

graemeh

2080 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 226

#517605 6-Sep-2011 16:18

alasta: I'd really like to see the Residential Tenacies Act amended to provide an out clause with a pre-determined penalty for breaking the fixed term. It's understandable that tenants may suffer a change in circumstances, but it's also undertandable that landlords don't expect to incur costs for a breach of contract on the other side. Things have a tendency to get very messy in situations like this.

So would that penalty apply to the landlord too so they could also cancel the agreement?

I'm not sure what problem you are trying to solve.

If there is a chance in circumstances the tenant (or landlord I think) can go to the tenancy tribunal to have the fixed term ended.

timmmay

20858 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5350

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#517621 6-Sep-2011 16:37

I had Quinovic as a property manager once. I found them unhelpful, unfriendly, expensive, slow to fix problems, and really just a pack of b*****ds. They're there for the landlord, not to help the tenant.

In this case I think they have a good point, and their fees don't seem entirely unreasonable. I bet they get fees from both you and the new tenant though.

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

networkn

Networkn
32862 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15453

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#517624 6-Sep-2011 16:50

You can always tell who's side someone will take based on who gets paid by whom. Unfortunately the OP didn't really have much of a leg to stand on and thankfully has enough morals not to try a runner (With a new fixed abode it would be hard anyways).

Sadly it's a pretty sticky situation.

When we bought the house we first lived in we had a 12 month contract but the landlord was actually pretty decent (not the agency). We had to pay until we filled it, but she worked with us, and we ended up actually needing a hotel for a week due to the way it fell, we bought her some flowers and I am happy with the resolution.

floydbloke

3646 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4554

ID Verified

#517625 6-Sep-2011 16:50

timmmay: I had Quinovic as a property manager once. I found them unhelpful, unfriendly, expensive, slow to fix problems, and really just a pack of b*****ds. They're there for the landlord, not to help the tenant.

In this case I think they have a good point, and their fees don't seem entirely unreasonable. I bet they get fees from both you and the new tenant though.

I have a relative who is working overseas and uses them to manage her property. Going by her experiences, they are after every cent they can possibly squeeze out of any agreement. They just looooove suggesting getting a tradesman in at the slighest hint of anything needing looking at so they can milk their 10% cut.

Edit: typos

Sometimes I use big words I don't always fully understand in an effort to make myself sound more photosynthesis.

graemeh

2080 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 226

#517626 6-Sep-2011 16:51

timmmay: I had Quinovic as a property manager once. I found them unhelpful, unfriendly, expensive, slow to fix problems, and really just a pack of b*****ds. They're there for the landlord, not to help the tenant.

I've heard landlords say similar things about Quinovic so in a lot of cases they seem to be there only for Quinovic.

As a franchise operation though they will all differ, some Quinovic franchises are good but most are not.

alasta

6889 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3363

Trusted

Subscriber

#517703 6-Sep-2011 18:48

graemeh:
alasta: I'd really like to see the Residential Tenacies Act amended to provide an out clause with a pre-determined penalty for breaking the fixed term. It's understandable that tenants may suffer a change in circumstances, but it's also undertandable that landlords don't expect to incur costs for a breach of contract on the other side. Things have a tendency to get very messy in situations like this.

So would that penalty apply to the landlord too so they could also cancel the agreement?

That sounds fair enough.

I'm not sure what problem you are trying to solve.

The problem I'm trying to solve is the uncertainty on the part of both parties as to what settlement would occur in the event of premature termination. Having a termination clause on the lease would prevent time and money being wasted on negotiating an exit if the need arises.

If there is a chance in circumstances the tenant (or landlord I think) can go to the tenancy tribunal to have the fixed term ended.

Only in situations of 'hardship', which I understand generally requires reasonably extreme circumstances.

A number of years ago I ended up in a position where I had to terminate a lease due to some personal issues that I won't go into here. The property managers told me that I had to keep paying rent until they found a replacement tenant which was fair enough, but they were dodgy enough that I had no confidence that they actually would go and actively look for replacement tenants. It ended up being incredibly stressful thinking that I could potentially end up with an $8000 liability to pay out the balance of the lease period, so if I'd had the option to pay six weeks rent to terminate the lease then it would have saved me all that stress and would have been highly unlikely to leave the landlord out of pocket.

Byrned

455 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 27

#517895 7-Sep-2011 07:48

Actually I have found with the TT that a couple of ways to end a fixed term lease is loss of employment, or your employment is moving you to a new city.

Also, with Quinovic finding a new tenant for the property, ensure that they're not trying to lock someone in for another year or whatever. They're only allowed to do it for what would be the remainder of your lease i.e. your current lease is due to expire in Feb, they're only allowed to specify a fixed term until then. Of course if the new tenant agrees to longer, then there's no problems. But if you find someone who wants the place, but only wants it until then, they're not allowed to reject those tenants on that basis.

1 | 2