Residential Tenants

<html><body>
Expert Observer

The standout feature of the behaviour of our politicians is the degree to which they are out of touch with their constituents and the impact of the decisions they make.

In the real estate sphere, the most startling recent example was the knee-jerk decision-making of state and territory governments in favour of pandemic-affected tenants, without any regard for the impact on the mum-and-dad households who own an investment property.

Equally, our elected representatives collectively appear oblivious to the rental shortage crisis that exists in most (not all) locations across the nation.

The situation has become dire in many parts of Australia, with queues of prospective tenants showing up at open houses and candidates offering more than the asking rent and/or offering to pay six or 12 months in advance to beat the competition.

Here’s the current situation …

According to the monthly report from SQM Research, vacancy rates in our already-tight rental markets fell in six of the capital cities and were unchanged in the other two in January.

The national average vacancy rate fell from 2.2% in December to 2% in January, but five capital cities – Perth, Adelaide, Canberra, Darwin and Hobart – all have vacancy rates below 1%, while Brisbane sits at 1.7%.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=8240]

Throughout regional Australia, many centres have vacancy rates below 1% in what represents a national rental crisis for people seeking tenancies. It’s common to find regional locations where the vacancy rate is closer to zero than to 1%.

Keep in mind the industry benchmark is that vacancy rates below 3% represent a shortage of rental properties. Below 1% is a dire situation.

The two biggest cities, where vacancies are highest, showed marked improvements in January, with Sydney falling from 3.6% in December to 3.2%, and Melbourne falling from 4.7% to 4.4%.

SQM CEO Louis Christopher says the figures provide more evidence the worse is over for landlords in the Sydney and Melbourne rental markets. 

He says: “The falls in vacancy rates for the month in those two cities, combined with the increased tightness in other cities and regions, has now brought rental vacancy rates down to below where they were prior to the outbreak of Covid19.”

Christopher says the data, overall, suggests that 2021 will remain largely a tenant’s market in the inner-city areas of the biggest cities “but will also very much remain a landlord’s market for regional Australia”. It would add to that the smaller capital cities – as shown earlier, six of them have ultra-tight rental markets. 
He also notes that rents for both houses and units have risen in the capital cities, on average, over the past month.

In annual terms, the national average is a 10% rise in house rents and a 4% increase in apartments rents.

The growth has been higher in regional markets than in the capital cities, with Sydney and Melbourne rents still lower on average than a year ago.

But there have been strong rises in Perth, Canberra and Darwin.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=22017]

In Perth, rents have risen 11.5% for houses and 12.3% for apartments, while in Darwin house rents have increased 27% in 12 months. In Canberra rents have risen around 6% for both houses and units.

The repercussions are spreading well beyond the immediate participants, tenants and landlords. Businesses in regional areas are struggling to find the workers they need because people interested in taking the jobs on offer can’t find anywhere to rent in those areas.

So what are our elected representatives doing about that? Essentially, nothing. They give the impression that aren’t even aware of the problem. This situation is just not part of the national discussion.

Partly mainstream media is to blame. Our major newspapers, especially the Fairfax ones, have been focusing their coverage on the few places in the nation that have high vacancies, specifically inner-city Melbourne and inner-city Sydney and creating the impression that we have an over-supply of dwellings – which is laughable.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=6201]

Federal Labor, if they had their way, would make matters worse by scrapping negative gearing, which would be a huge disincentive to investors.

What we need is the opposite – measures to encourage people to buy investment properties and make them available for rental. Rental vacancies are an outcome of the activity of investor buyers – and their absence in recent years is a chief reason we have this crisis.

HomeBuilder is helping the situation by encouraging the creation of new dwellings, but more needs to be done.

If politicians want to help tenants, they need to encourage landlords – instead of treating property investors (most of them ordinary mum-and-dad households) as a criminal class.

Terry Ryder is the founder of hotspotting.com.au

ryder@hotspotting.com.au

twitter.com/hotspotting
</body></html>

According to the monthly report from SQM Research, vacancy rates in our already-tight rental markets fell in six of the capital cities and were unchanged in the other two in January.



terryryder

Mum and dad investors hit by favourable COVID-affected tenant rules: Hotspotting's Terry Ryder

<html><body>
Tenants and landlords in New South Wales are set to see a huge shake up of the state's rental laws, along the lines of laws already implemented by the Labor Government in Victoria.
The biggest change in the Residential Tenancies Act will put a cap on the timing of rental increases for periodic leases.
An increase will be limited to once a year.
There will be set fees for breaking a fixed term lease, however there will be no penalties for domestic violence victims who break the lease.
Currently tenants who break the lease must pay six weeks in the first half of a fixed term, or four weeks after the mid-way point of the lease.
Matt Kean, the Better Regulation Minister, called the changes common-sense.
“Under these common-sense changes, renting families will be able to make minor alterations, such as installing a picture hook to hang their family photos, and will benefit from a new set of minimum standards to ensure properties are in a liveable condition,” Mr Kean said.
“I believe we’ve struck the right balance with this reform, and I’m proud to be leading change that benefits the people of NSW.”
Since 2016 when the Census figures found one third of New South Wales residents were renters, the lobbying began to amend the Residential Tenancy Act.
Kean called the changes a "sweeping reform for tenants' rights."
 
 
</body></html>

jonathanchancellor-7SQnKwU6yx

NSW Government rental laws set to favour tenants in major overhaul

<html><body>
EXPERT OBSERVER
A message to tenants who have lost or are facing losing their job.
There is so much information swirling around out there that it is difficult to understand where to turn. We get that.
There is state and federal government assistance out there but when you have to wait on hold to Centrelink just to get your ID number, that’s frustrating. We get it.
I said last week that our industry wants to help you. That’s our role. Looking after tenants who have lost employment is nothing new to us. What is new is the scale of the problem, but we will help you get through this. 
You need to continue to pay your rent if you can afford to do so. If you don’t it creates a problem for you down the track and also creates problems for the owner of the property in which you live, many of whom have also lost their jobs and have families and children to feed. 
If you can’t afford to pay your rent, we understand. Don’t bury your head in the sand and think that the problem will go away because it won’t. TALK TO US! We will sort something out for you. We encounter this scenario all the time. 
For example…Mary rents a home and pays $250 per week in rent. Mary’s work hours have been reduced by half. Mary comes to us, tells us her story (and shows us a letter from her employer) and says that she can now only afford to pay $150 per week for the next three months. NO PROBLEM! We speak with the owner who is understanding and agrees to reduced rent payments of $150 per week for the next three months. It’s that simple. 
Another example…John and his three mates rent a share house for $400 per week. Two of John’s mates lose their jobs. John talks to the agent to seek a short-term rent reduction to $250 per week until his mates get back on their feet and the owner agrees. A simple outcome. 
In both of the above commonplace examples everybody wins. Everyone keeps a roof over their heads (which everybody needs and will get right at the moment) plus the property owner can brace themselves for lower rental income. It’s not difficult but COMMUNICATION IS KEY.
Last message to tenants. Yesterday the Prime Minister offered you a monetary lifeline. Talk to your employer and go and get it. There is your rental assistance and cash for other expenses right there. Go find it. 
TO STATE GOVERNMENTS 
I’m assuming that all state governments would prefer a soft landing at the other end of this crisis than a hard one. 
The real estate industry stands ready to assist as we always have. Note the examples above. This is our forte and we are ready to do whatever we need to do to make sure that our tenants and property owners suffer as little damage as possible. 
Your governments need to step up and reach a unified position on this and that position must be to keep the cash flowing through the economy. We have all been offered a lifeline yesterday by the federal government in the form of wages assistance so that everyday Australians can continue to pay their bills including rent. 
The rent cash flow ensures that everyone wins and I unashamedly include the real estate agent in that. We need income in order to continue to employ our property managers who are at the coal face of looking after both tenants and landlords. Leaving tenants and landlords to sort out their own mess will end in utter anarchy. 
For example, what about the case of a tenant who lives in a rental property in Melbourne but the owner of that property lives in Brisbane. They have never met. How will that negotiation end up?
 TO PROPERTY OWNERS 
We know that this is a stressful time for you, particularly for those of you that just like your tenant, have also lost employment. 
We are here for you as we always have been and we will help you and your tenant get through this. We are all in this together. 
But, I have heard stories of some property owners, particularly those managing  their own properties trying to take advantage of the situation we find ourselves in. For those owners who do this, you are nothing short of greedy and pathetic. Just stop it and show some compassion.
 TO TENANT LOBBY GROUPS 
You need to understand that our industry wants the same outcome as you; to keep everybody housed and feeling secure at this time, but we all need to play our part. Simply calling for free rent for everybody just doesn’t cut it. You need to be more socially and financially responsible than that and perhaps once and for all finally understand that money doesn’t grow on trees. 
Tenants who are still in employment need to continue to pay the rent and you need to be supportive of this because it is the right thing to do. 
For those tenants who have lost employment or have had their hours reduced, let our industry work through those issues. You simply calling for everyone else to “suck it up” is utter nonsense given the mess that we are all in. You need to show some true leadership for all Australians because that is the only way that we will all get through this. 
TO OUR INDUSTRY 
Thank you for the leadership that you are showing during these trying times. We will get through this but there will also be casualties. 
Above all else, please continue to look after your tenants, even including those who are trying to abuse the system. Now is not the time to be petty. We all need to step up and get on with it.
</body></html>

jrobinson-rf4aSBido9

A message to tenants from REIA President Adrian Kelly

<html><body>
The national cabinet has agreed to consider advice from Treasurers on commercial and residential tenancies at their next meeting on Friday April 3.
Tenants and landlords are left in limbo as to how they will be affected.
A <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/112023-six-month-moratorium-on-evicting-residential-tenants-during-the-coronavirus-shutdown" target="_blank">six month ban on evictions</a> has been announced, although the plan is yet to be fully outlined.
It was nearly a week ago that Scott Morrison said there will "soon be an announcement" for the hundreds of thousands of people who have lost their jobs and small business operators who can't pay rent.
He described the issue as complex. 
"A lot of progress has been made over the course of today and over the course of this week, we'll be looking to hopefully finalise some measures", Morrison said when responding when the government will announce how they will help to ease people's rent bill.
"This is obviously a complicated issue because you've got a tenant, you've got a landlord, you've got creditors and all of those issues and you need to solve for the entire chain that's there", Morrison said.
It was to be considered at the National Cabinet that evening, however there is still no formal decision made.
The president of the REIA, Adrian Kelly said while he is very supportive of the Government's efforts, the REIA was disappointed with the simplistic approach of the Prime Minister’s message.
He suggested the PM's message "ignores the tenancy arrangement and thus raises more questions than it answers."
“Real estate agents are the middle persons who facilitate the agreement between landlords and tenants and manage it as well as the property."
Adrian Kelly said the government's moratorium on evictions overlooks the fact that real estate agents and agencies are also going to be affected by the ongoing crisis.
"We need to address the support of agents so that what the prime minister wants, in terms of landlords and tenants — finding a solution to get through the crisis, can be achieved," Kelly said.
"Estate agents will work very hard to facilitate the role between landlord and tenant, and to do this they need income."
The parliaments of two states, NSW and Tasmania have passed legislation on evictions although they are unlikely to become law since they did not emerge from the government benches.
 
 
 
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

The national cabinet to consider commercial and residential tenancies on April 3

<html><body>
The minister for housing Michael Sukkar's has clarified what the six month moratorium on evictions means .
The ABC's Patricia Karvelas asked if people can stop paying rent if there's a moratorium.
"The short answer to your question is of course not", Sukkar said.
"There is a moratorium on evictions, but there's not a moratorium on the requirement to pay rents", Sukkar added.
The housing minister said it's useful to separate commercial and residential.
"From a commercial perspective, I know that our national cabinet will have more to say further to their principles that were outlined last week on how, particularly states and territories, are going to deal with it.
"As the PM has said, we need landlords and tenants to come together, and there must be an element of sharing the pain."
Sukkar said it's not in any landlords interest to lose a great tenant who may be going through short term difficulty.
"We are seeing a lot of landlords and tenants working closely together but we need to put in some minimum standards and that's what I'm confident the national cabinet will do."
Sukkar's clarification has been welcomed by the Real Estate Institute of Australia.
“A moratorium on evictions doesn’t mean rent is not payable, it is", REIA president Adrian Kelly said.
"If circumstances mean that payment in full is not possible it is a holding off from payments, not a cancellation.
“It is for people who cannot pay at this time not for those that can.
“If you can pay your rent now, you pay it.
“If you can’t pay your rent now, you have been given grace for six months, but will have to catch up when you are able to pay it again.”
 
</body></html>

Tenants in rental moratorium will have to pay rents: Housing Minister

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
After years of strong housing market growth, Sydney’s property market is slowing. Despite this, housing stress remains a reality for many Sydneysiders, with rents remaining largely untouched.
Public housing is a lifeline for those who can’t afford to rent in the private market, but the numbers of households in this position means many must wait years for a place.
Median rents for apartments in Sydney fell only 0.9% in the September quarter, to $545 a week. This means a household needs to earn about $94,000 a year to avoid housing stress. About half of the households in Sydney earn less than this.
Adding to these cost pressures, tenancy laws are strongly weighted in favour of landlords. This gives tenants little security of tenure and exposes them to frequent upheaval, inadequate conditions and rental hikes.
But public housing tenants are also facing upheaval and uncertainty in inner-city areas such as Waterloo and Redfern, as a result of redevelopments that they feel are aimed at pushing their communities out of the city.
What is happening to public housing?
The lack of public housing investment in New South Wales and the costs of private rental mean over 50,000 people are on the state waiting list. In inner-city areas, they face a wait of five to ten years for public housing.
Through the Communities Plus program and the Social and Affordable Housing Fund, the NSW government plans to build 27,000 more social and affordable homes. But this figure is somewhat misleading. In the last three years, the government has sold off half as much public housing as it has built. And the figure of 27,000 looks more like 9,900 when you consider that this includes around 17,000 dwellings that will be demolished and rebuilt.
Several of the housing estates that remain will undergo massive redevelopment. One of these projects involves Sydney’s largest inner-city public housing estates, in Waterloo. The redevelopment will transform it into a mixed estate of 70% private housing and 30% social housing, going from just over 2,000 dwellings to potentially more than 7,000.
Residents fear being pushed out
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/246155/original/file-20181119-27770-5vm6vj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=237&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
The Waterloo redevelopment will produce a mixed estate of 30% social housing and 70% private. Carol Tang, Author provided
Since the redevelopment was announced in 2015, we have been working with the residents of Waterloo to understand their experience of the redevelopment. Many residents feel the project is a ploy to “move the poor people out of the city”, as one of them put it.
While the government has promised everyone the right to return, there is still a huge amount of uncertainty. And this is justified given that, like many large infrastructure projects conceived during Sydney’s boom time, the Waterloo project will be subject to many changes and delays.
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/246164/original/file-20181119-76131-1afyq2u.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=237&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
Residents of the Matavai and Turanga towers installed coloured lights in their windows to make a statement: ‘We live here’. Nic Waler, Author provided
The residents of Waterloo, however, will not go quietly. “People are trying to speak up,” says Maryanne Laumua, a Waterloo tenant and key team member of the WeLiveHere2017 project.
One of the ways that residents are speaking up is by making their presence known on Sydney’s skyline. In September 2017, residents in the tallest of Waterloo’s towers, Matavai and Turanga, installed coloured lights in their apartment windows to make a statement: “We live here”. The residents’ efforts are chronicled in a new ABC documentary, There Goes Our Neighbourhood.
A long history of displacement
A history of displacement through colonialism, redevelopment and evictions has shaped Waterloo and neighbouring Redfern. The Gadigal people were violently dispossessed of their country after European invasion. Throughout the last century, “slum clearance” displaced many working-class households.
The demolition of The Block in Redfern removed many Aboriginal families from their homes. The redevelopment in neighbouring Waterloo comes at a time when approval has been given to redevelop The Block. The Redfern development includes construction of student housing that seems to have priority over affordable Indigenous housing.
These areas also have a long history of organising against displacement. Waterloo residents joined with the unions as part of the 1970s Green Bans campaigns to limit the destruction of working-class housing in the suburb. Jenny Munro and other Aboriginal leaders have campaigned tirelessly for the rights of their community, which includes a years-long tent embassy protest on the site of The Block.
The redevelopment of Waterloo’s public housing estate will hardly make a dent in easing housing pressure in Sydney. And as Waterloo resident Karyn Brown puts it: 
"To solve the city’s housing crisis, they are picking on public housing tenants, those on the second rung of the housing ladder."
Waterloo tenants resisting the redevelopment are concerned that it’s a form of state-led gentrification. They see the notion of “social mix” — the idea that introducing private owners and tenants can “fix” disadvantaged communities — as a smokescreen for the class upgrading of their neighbourhood. Indeed, there is little empirical evidence to support the notion that social mix can solve a community’s problems.
Rather than a project intended to alleviate their disadvantage, many tenants feel that “social mix” is both classist and racist. As Lorna Munro and Joel Sherwood-Spring put it, the dilution of the existing community including the Aboriginal population is simply a continuation of the colonial project.
The residents of Waterloo’s public housing might be far from the city’s wealthiest residents, but they’ve got fighting spirit and community pride in spades. As There Goes Our Neighbourhood shows, this community is diverse, creative and determined to fight for their right to remain in the city.
Pratichi Chatterjee, PhD Student, Urban Geography, University of Sydney
Alistair Sisson, PhD Candidate, Urban Geography, University of Sydney
Jenna Condie, Lecturer in Digital Research and Online Social Analysis, Western Sydney University
Laura Wynne, PhD Candidate, School of Social Sciences, UTas and Senior Research Consultant, Institute for Sustainable Futures, UTS, University of Tasmania
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/we-still-live-here-public-housing-tenants-fight-for-their-place-in-the-city-107188" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Public housing tenants fighting for their place in the city

<html><body>
The Melbourne-bound chef Martin Benn and partner, Sepia’s front of house manager Vicki Wild (right), have secured tenants for their ­vacated Sydney home.
The Gladesville home had a rental asking price of $1750 a week.
The couple bought the 1900s renovated brick cottage in 2015 for $2.5 million upgrading from their Rozelle apartment which sold for $1.06 million.
Set on 685sqm, the Gladesville home has five bedrooms and a solar-heated pool.
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2018/12/3/gladesville%202.jpg" alt="">
The couple are heading south after veteran restaurateur Chris Lucas, owner of the Chin Chin chain, convinced them to come to Melbourne where they will establish a fine-dining restaurant, due to open in 2020.
Their three-hat restaurant Sepia in the Sydney CBD, which closes in a fortnight, has been operating since 2009.
The most famous restaurant couple in Australia have only ever worked and lived together, excepting for one short stint in Hong Kong.
Last year Lucas, the king of Melbourne casual dining, bought a $3.4 million bolthole in Potts Point ahead of the opening of the Chin Chin restaurant on the ground floor of the Griffiths Teas Building on Wentworth Ave, Surry Hills.
This story first appeared in The Sunday Telegraph. 
</body></html>

firstname1-iYD4UYzvBa

Sepia chef Martin Benn finds Gladesville home tenants

<html><body>
The now Melbourne-based chef Martin Benn and partner, Sepia’s front of house manager Vicki Wild (right), have now been revealed as set to open an upmarket eatery at QIC's Collins Street development.
The premises will be at 80 Collins Street.
The 47-storey tower on the corner of Collins and Exhibition streets will house international luxury, beauty and lifestyle brands as well as commercial offices.
The planned restaurant, spanning multiple levels and with eight-metre ceilings, will sit atop the retail precinct with outdoor terraces.
It was late last year when Property Observer reported they had secured tenants for their ­vacated Sydney home.
The Gladesville home had a rental asking price of $1750 a week.
The couple bought the 1900s renovated brick cottage in 2015 for $2.5 million upgrading from their Rozelle apartment which sold for $1.06 million.
Set on 685sqm, the Gladesville home has five bedrooms and a solar-heated pool.
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2018/12/3/gladesville%202.jpg" alt="">
The couple are heading south after veteran restaurateur Chris Lucas, owner of the Chin Chin chain, convinced them to come to Melbourne where they will establish a fine-dining restaurant, due to open in 2020.
Their three-hat restaurant Sepia in the Sydney CBD had been operating since 2009 until its late 2018 closure.
The most famous restaurant couple in Australia have only ever worked and lived together, excepting for one short stint in Hong Kong.
Last year Lucas, the king of Melbourne casual dining, bought a $3.4 million bolthole in Potts Point ahead of the opening of the Chin Chin restaurant on the ground floor of the Griffiths Teas Building on Wentworth Ave, Surry Hills.
At Thursday's restaurant launch, Melbourne's struggling Lord Mayor Sally Capp praised the venture saying it was a "coup" to have lured Benn and Wild from Sydney.
</body></html>

Sepia chef Martin Benn finds next kitchen at QIC's Collins Street, Melbourne development

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION

A Victorian court decision that an Airbnb agreement had the status of a lease has profound implications for guests and hosts.

With summer holidays around the corner, many Victorians may be thinking about offering their homes through a home-share platform, such as Airbnb, while they get away themselves. Airbnb’s terms of service describe home-share arrangements as a “<a href="https://www.airbnb.com.au/terms" target="_blank">licence</a>”. Legally, a licence can be terminated at any time and a guest who does not leave is a trespasser.

However, in 2016 the <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/http://www6.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/vic/VSC/2016/313" target="_blank">Victorian Supreme Court decided</a> home-share arrangements may constitute a lease. This decision indicates residential tenancy law may apply to all home-share arrangements where the host is away from the premises.

This would impose significant legal obligations on hosts, who would be regarded as landlords. Guests, if considered tenants, would have all the associated legal protections.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=8032]

For example, if a guest refuses to leave the premises, the host/landlord would have to follow the eviction process required by tenancy law. This has happened in <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/airbnb-host-cant-get-squatter-to-leave-2014-7/commerce-on-business-insider/?r=AU&amp;IR=T" target="_blank">California</a>. Australian courts will eventually have to decide this issue.

How did the court arrive at its decision?

The court’s decision involved a tenant who offered the premises to guests on Airbnb. The court decided the tenant had breached the terms of the lease by subletting the premises. The tenant was evicted, as tenants cannot sublet without the landlord’s consent under <a href="http://www6.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/vic/consol_act/rta1997207/s81" target="_blank">tenancy law</a>.

The court focused on the relationship between the tenant and the guest and determined that the host had given “exclusive possession” of the premises to guests. In Victorian tenancy law, exclusive possession is required to create a lease.

The court said it did not matter that each guest’s stay was only a few days, or that the Airbnb terms described the arrangement as a “licence” rather than a lease.

Although the court’s decision applied to tenants in this case, logically the decision applies to all whole-of-premises home-share arrangements, including where the host owns the premises. This is because the legal test for creating a lease is the same as that for creating a sublease.

The decision is controversial because home sharing on Airbnb is similar to boarding arrangements (where the host provides accommodation and services such as cleaning), hotel rooms and serviced apartments. These arrangements are usually regarded as a licence, not a lease. This is because the host has access to the property during the guest’s stay (for example, to do cleaning), so exclusive possession is not given to the guest.

In fact, Airbnb arrangements are unlike typical tenancy agreements. They specify check-in and check-out times, furniture, linen and towels are usually provided, and “house rules” (for example, on noise levels and smoking) may restrict the guest’s use of the premises.

In addition, Victorian residential tenancy laws <a href="http://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/rta1997207/s10" target="_blank">do not apply to premises ordinarily used for holidays</a>. Potentially, this could exclude premises used for home sharing.

The situation may be different in other Australian states and territories, which, unlike Victoria, exclude from residential tenancies legislation agreements for the purpose of a holiday. However, not all home sharing is done for holiday purposes. For example, it’s also used for travel for business.

Legal uncertainty remains

The court’s decision means tenants who provide rented premises on Airbnb without the landlord’s consent may breach their own tenancy agreement and be evicted. However, the court stated that the particular circumstances of each case must be examined.

For example, hosts who provide only part of the premises (such as a bedroom and shared used of a kitchen) but who continue to reside in the premises will not be subletting. This is because they have not provided exclusive use of the premises.

However, if the host is away from the premises, then residential tenancy law may regulate home-share arrangements. This would give guests (now considered a tenant) stronger legal protections, including protection from eviction. The decision shows a court can ignore the description of the arrangement in an agreement if it determines exclusive possession has been provided.

Airbnb provides support to hosts and guests in the case of a dispute over a stay. It also provides compensation to hosts (akin to insurance) if guests damage the property or cause the host financial loss. However, if a host is found to have obligations under residential tenancy law, these obligations belong to the host/landlord, not to Airbnb.

The contentious aspect of the Supreme Court’s decision is its treatment of short-term hotel-like accommodation as a lease. However, it strongly suggests that <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/AdelLawRw/2018/10">residential tenancy law may regulate</a> whole-of-premises home-share arrangements. That’s likely to come as a shock to Airbnb hosts - owners and renters alike.<img alt="The Conversation" height="1" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/128051/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;" width="1">

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/bill-john-swannie-161231">Bill John Swannie</a>, Lecturer in College of Law and Justice, <a href="http://theconversation.com/institutions/victoria-university-1175">Victoria University</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/chris-martin-203935">Chris Martin</a>, Research Fellow, City Futures Research Centre, <a href="http://theconversation.com/institutions/unsw-1414">UNSW</a>

This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/your-airbnb-guest-could-be-a-tenant-until-the-law-is-cleared-up-hosts-are-in-limbo-128051">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Residential Tenants

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Residential Tenants

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News