Society/Culture Landlords - What is the point?

[faible]

YEP, standard issue.

It’s really not. The VAST majority of tenancies look nothing like the described. Tenants in VIC have more protections than in other states, but we’re still a very long way from having the level of protections needed for the generations coming through that are more likely to be life-long renters.

Anecdotal stories like the one you mentioned are very much unrepresentative of the experience of most landlords or most tenants. The system is still far more structurally skewed in favour of landlords.

 

[Vassp]

It’s really not. The VAST majority of tenancies look nothing like the described. Tenants in VIC have more protections than in other states, but we’re still a very long way from having the level of protections needed for the generations coming through that are more likely to be life-long renters.

Anecdotal stories like the one you mentioned are very much unrepresentative of the experience of most landlords or most tenants. The system is still far more structurally skewed in favour of landlords.

um.... you're telling me? MY folks have owned rentals for 40 years. I've seen it all. Cheers.

 

[faible]

um.... you're telling me? MY folks have owned rentals for 40 years. I've seen it all. Cheers.

So it’s not ‘standard issue’ then.

 

[Vassp]

So it’s not ‘standard issue’ then.

What's your angle? Of course, there are different circumstances.......

EDIT, my point was that there are many landlords leaving the market due to high costs.

And example that was mentioned earlier by a poster, and what happened is STANDARD issue for that circumstance.
The landlord fits the bill, or the insurance....

Can I ask, are you a landlord?

 

[faible]

What's your angle? Of course, there are different circumstances.......

You came in with an anecdote that is a tiny percentage of the tenancies out there, then followed up with a ‘lol standard issue’ post.

Apparently you know it’s not representative but decided to say it anyway.

My angle is that it’s inaccurate.

 

[Vassp]

You came in with an anecdote that is a tiny percentage of the tenancies out there, then followed up with a ‘lol standard issue’ post.

Apparently you know it’s not representative but decided to say it anyway.

My angle is that it’s inaccurate.

It's accurate for the end result, which is what I was talking about. See my edited post.

Are you a landlord? or have ever been a landlord?

 

[faible]

It's accurate for the end result, which is what I was talking about. See my edited post.

Are you a landlord? or have ever been a landlord?

I’ve been fortunate enough to enjoy the full spectrum of experiences.

The system is still very much weighted in favour of property owners. Anecdotal stories don’t change that.

 

[Vassp]

I’ve been fortunate enough to enjoy the full spectrum of experiences.

The system is still very much weighted in favour of property owners. Anecdotal stories don’t change that.

Still stuck on that bone aren't you? I didn't make the story up, it was said by another poster,
I said that the end result was standard = slang for common. cant spell it out more than that.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

um.... you're telling me? MY folks have owned rentals for 40 years. I've seen it all. Cheers.

Obviously it's not as bad as you make out, or they would have sold years ago....

 

[Vassp]

Obviously it's not as bad as you make out, or they would have sold years ago....

not the point I was making, re read the post to understand them please. You and the other poster completely missed the point.

 

[JHF1870]

It’s really not. The VAST majority of tenancies look nothing like the described. Tenants in VIC have more protections than in other states, but we’re still a very long way from having the level of protections needed for the generations coming through that are more likely to be life-long renters.

Anecdotal stories like the one you mentioned are very much unrepresentative of the experience of most landlords or most tenants. The system is still far more structurally skewed in favour of landlords.

I can only go on what my colleague told me but he was told by the magistrate that because she had nothing and he was better off that she couldn't be evicted despite trashing the place, being a drug user. They put her on a payment plan as she hadn't paid for months. It was only when she refused to pay that that she got kicked out.

Doesn't sound like 'balanced' to me.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Still stuck on that bone aren't you? I didn't make the story up, it was said by another poster,
I said that the end result was standard = slang for common. cant spell it out more than that.

Except it's NOT common.

 

[faible]

I can only go on what my colleague told me but he was told by the magistrate that because she had nothing and he was better off that she couldn't be evicted despite trashing the place, being a drug user. They put her on a payment plan as she hadn't paid for months. It was only when she refused to pay that that she got kicked out.

Doesn't sound like 'balanced' to me.

See below:

The VAST majority of tenancies look nothing like the described

that is a tiny percentage of the tenancies out there

 

[faible]

slang for common

We end up right back here:

Apparently you know it’s not representative but decided to say it anyway.