Karen Wheller

Getting Started

How to get started in property investing with no money and a low income salary.

Get your FREE e-book now


Need real estate FREE documents?

Legal documents, analysis tools, application forms, NCA forms and more.

Click here to get documents FREE

Home arrow Blog arrow Should the government pay for your rental income loses?
Should the government pay for your rental income loses?

If the government doesn’t want to take responsibility for their own legislation they should pay for the consequences, or shouldn't they?

This is about rental income that property investors and landlords don't get paid and lose solely because of some misinterpreted and missapplied law and eventually may risk losing their property because they can't pay the bond.

The Rental Housing Act 50 of 1999 speaks of being “just and equitable” to landlords and tenants. Then why does the implementation certain parts of the act and surrounding laws put property investors and landlords at risk of repossession and losses?

And why shouldn’t the Housing Department pay compensation to landlords that get repossessed because of their own implementation and lack of proper definitions in the laws?

Imagine one landlord, a person, a property investor like any other person, like you and me, rents out the property to a tenant. This landlord has done nothing wrong, but all of the sudden the tenant doesn’t pay. This property investor, a regular person, can’t pay the bond all of the sudden because the rental is not coming in.

The law has clauses that protect this landlord and in the law this landlord has rights. But what if they are not implemented correctly? Or what if for a minor definition issue things drags out enough for the landlord to be repossessed while the tenant which now is an “unlawful occupier” still sits in his premises and has the unlawful enjoyment of the property.

Is this just and equitable? Ok, here is the story.

We spoke to property investors and letting agents which all encountered situations like these and more than once. The sad story is that the individual landlord can be wiped out in an incident like this.

Right now there is a big gap in two areas of the Rental Housing Act:

1.    The definition of “unlawful occupier” is a big problem

2.     The recommendations that come from rental housing tribunal, which are not based in any law.

Yes, law should prevail, but who would know if it does or doesn’t when you don’t know the law. And what is it doesn’t prevail? What would you do?

The problem right now is that if a property investor and landlord end-ups with an “unlawful occupier” in the premises that had the lease terminated completely legally, the rental housing tribunals give some advise that is not written in the law, or not any law that they can provide in black and while.  You may want to read that again, so that it sinks in.

Then the question arises “How is this just and equitable?” that the landlord ends up with unlawful tenants and can’t pay the bond, because they don’t pay the rent, and suffers loses and risk of repossession but the “unlawful occupier”. But if you analyze the law, that shouldn’t be the case. The property owner in the law has the right to get his property back immediately in certain cases.

Do landlords get their property back immediately or easily and quickly? Not really.

The landlord or property investor, invests, provides housing and then pays the price for it. Is that just and equitable?

This happens often because the process is lengthy and made hard and difficult for landlords, even though it shouldn’t be so, for no good reason. And lets face it, risking the investors’ property can’t possibly be just nor equitable because of bad tenants. After all, the landlord pays the bond and the “unlawful occupier” stands to gain everything. Is this just and equitable?

And how is it just and equitable that the landlord has to pay the utilities at his own cost when he has “unlawful occupiers”?

I don’t think this could possible be just and equitable.

So, in light of these problems, wrong advice given by tribunals, Property Investor Network has decided to create a petition to the Housing Minister.

Because such things, should not happen in a just and equitable democracy, we need your help, to make all property owners and property investors aware that some things have to change, some things have to be implemented in a just and equitable way to create a just and equitable situation and people in the government should take responsibility for their own legislation.

For this we need your help, everyone’s help. It is about you as a landlord and a property investor, it is about your right for written law to be implemented in the just and equitable way to protect you as an owner of property and it is now up to you to make this happen.

Read the whole story here in the petition . Pass it on, to as many people you know, make a difference because you need to make sure you are protected if you land up with an “unlawful occupier” and it is cheaper to make a difference now rather than pay to solve the problems later and fight for your rights.

Please read the Rental Housing Act Petition , blog, about it, bookmarket it, and send it to as many people as you can, this is important to make a difference when just and equitable law may not be inforced in a just and equitable way.


Add NewSearchRSS
PMM     | | 2008-10-30 03:56:02
I think that this should be implemented, to protect these people from renters who don't pay and wont leave
Write comment
[b] [i] [u] [url] [quote] [code] [img] 
Security Image
Please input the anti-spam code that you can read in the image.

Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved.

< Prev   Next >