logo
NSW real estate agents threaten renters with fees if they are not home for tradespeople – but legally they don't have to be

NSW real estate agents threaten renters with fees if they are not home for tradespeople – but legally they don't have to be

The Guardian6 days ago
New South Wales real estate agents are threatening renters with fees as high as $330 if they are not at home to let maintenance workers in, despite there being no legal requirement for renters to personally allow entry.
On 8 July, Lauren Gillin's agency told her she needed to be home during a two-and-a-half-hour window seven days from that date to allow access for a smoke alarm inspector or pay a $90 fee.
'Please make yourself available, this inspection is compulsory, and access must be provided,' Gillin's property manager at Rich & Oliva said in a letter seen by Guardian Australia.
'Should access not be made available, a fee of $90 will be incurred for re-inspection.'
In a statement, a NSW Fair Trading spokesperson said real estate agents must provide two days' notice for 'non-urgent repairs or inspection of a smoke alarm'.
However, 'there is no requirement for the tenant to be in the property for the inspection,' the spokesperson confirmed.
Further, 'the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW) limits fees and charges a landlord or agent can ask a tenant to pay, with only certain payments such as rent, rental bond and other prescribed fees allowed to be charged'.
Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email
Gillin, a media manager at a community legal centre who lives in Haberfield in Sydney's inner west, said she was disappointed by the letter.
'It's an unreasonable request to be home for 2.5 hours on a weekday.'
Tenants of an apartment block in the city's eastern suburbs received a similar notice from a different real estate agency, which Guardian Australia has chosen not to identify because renters said they were worried about the potential consequences.
That agency wrote to the tenants in June, in an email seen by Guardian Australia, telling them they needed to be home on a day late that month between 9.30am and 10.30am for a mandatory fire safety inspection.
The email warned that any failure to give access to the home would result in a re-inspection fee of $330 and advised the tenants to organise someone on their behalf to allow access if they could not do so.
The Tenants' Union of NSW chief executive officer, Leo Patterson Ross, said the $90 charge Gillin faced did not 'strictly have any basis' because the agent or landlord could still give access to the smoke alarm inspector by organising entry.
'As long as the tenant hasn't actively prevented them from entering the property, then there's no basis for that charge,' he said.
Patterson Ross said the $330 fee faced by residents of the eastern suburbs apartment block was 'pretty much the exact same situation' – there was no legal basis for the charge.
'The agent, probably, in a building like that where there's a lot of people, they don't want to spend their whole day walking around all the apartments,' he said. 'But there's nothing stopping them from doing that.'
Patterson Ross said more than 2,100 people contacted the tenants' union in 2024 for advice about access issues.
He said he regularly spoke to renters who had been threatened with fees for supposedly not allowing access to their homes, who assumed the charges were legitimate.
Sign up to Breaking News Australia
Get the most important news as it breaks
after newsletter promotion
'No one's told the agent they can't do it and it becomes normal and then they train other people and it becomes process without anyone really checking whether it's compliant with the law,' Patterson Ross said.
'Generally, a lot of the pressure of enforcing the legislation is falling on the tenant at the moment.'
Gillin said she tried to raise her concerns with one of the Rich & Olivia staff members, but did not feel the issue was resolved. The company did not respond to Guardian Australia's request for comment.
On 8 July, Gillin lodged a complaint with the agency.
In the email, seen by Guardian Australia, Gillin said her experience with the agency had otherwise 'been really positive' which made the letter she got from them 'all the more surprising'.
She followed up on 9 July, citing legal advice she had received from the tenants' union and the NSW rental commissioner, Trina Jones, that she did not need to be at home during a smoke alarm inspection.
Jones told Guardian Australia that a fee for not being present during a smoke alarm inspection could not legally be passed on to tenants.
She said the state's rental taskforce – which was created earlier this year – contacted Gillin's agent to advise them of their responsibilities under the law and make clear the charge was not permitted.
'Illegal fees and charges remain an issue in the sector,' Jones said. 'Since January, the Rental Taskforce has overseen refunds of $165,303 to renters who were charged unlawful fees.'
On Wednesday, Gillin said the smoke alarm technician let her know they had got a key from the agency to let themselves into the property.
But she said the agency still had not responded to her complaint.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Australian-made rocket crashes with Vegemite payload
Australian-made rocket crashes with Vegemite payload

Telegraph

timean hour ago

  • Telegraph

Australian-made rocket crashes with Vegemite payload

An Australian orbital rocket carrying a jar of Vegemite in its nose cone crashed after 14 seconds of flight on Wednesday. Gilmour Space Technologies, the aerospace company behind the launch, is attempting to send the first Australian-made rocket into orbit from the country's soil. The firm had said earlier it would consider the launch a success if the rocket left the ground. 'I'm so relieved you couldn't believe,' Adam Gilmour, the chief executive of the aerospace firm told AFP news agency. 'I was so nervous about it getting off the pad, that when it did I screamed in pure joy.' Footage shows the rocket barely clearing the top of the launch tower, briefly hovering above the ground before running out of steam. The 23-metre vehicle – designed to launch small satellites into low-Earth orbit – took off from Abbot Point, about 1,000 kilometres (600 miles) up from Brisbane. The payload for the test flight was a jar of Vegemite, a popular Australian spread, which was strapped inside the rocket's nose cone. Mr Gilmour said preparations for a second test flight were already under way, with a view to launching within the next 'six to eight months'. 'It's huge what you can prove with just 10 to 15 seconds of flight time,' he said. He added: 'I'm sorry to say the Vegemite didn't make it.' Millions in grants The company, which has 230 employees, hopes to start commercial launches in late 2026 or early 2027. Gilmour Space Technologies has private funders and was awarded a grant of five million Australian dollars (£2.4m) this month from the country's federal government for the development of the Eris rocket. It followed the firm's A$52m (£25.3m) grant agreement with the government in 2023 to advance the development and commercialisation of new space technologies in Australia. The country has been the site of hundreds of suborbital vehicle launches but there have only been two successful launches to orbit from Australia before, according to the aerospace news platform NASASpaceFlight. The Eris test flight was the first orbital launch attempt from Australia in more than 50 years.

Australian court rejects X Corp.'s appeal in child safety case, orders legal costs
Australian court rejects X Corp.'s appeal in child safety case, orders legal costs

The Independent

time3 hours ago

  • The Independent

Australian court rejects X Corp.'s appeal in child safety case, orders legal costs

An Australian appeals court on Thursday ruled against X Corp., rejecting a challenge to a safety watchdog's demands for details on how the Elon Musk -owned company was combating widespread child exploitation material on its platform. Three federal court judges unanimously rejected X's appeal against a federal court decision in October last year that the company was obliged to respond to a notice from eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant on child abuse material being shared on X, which is incorporated in Texas. The judges also ordered X to pay the commissioner's legal costs. Inman Grant's office describes itself as the world's first government agency dedicated to keeping people safe online. Inman Grant has driven world-first legislation that will ban Australian children younger than 16 from social media platforms including X from December. The federal court case goes back to early 2023, when Inman Grant asked some of the world's largest technology companies to report on what they were doing about child abuse material appearing on their platforms. A reporting notice, issued under Australia's Online Safety Act, was sent to Twitter Inc., incorporated in Delaware, in February that year. Twitter merged with X the following month. X arguments against complying with Inman Grant's order included that Twitter no longer existed as a legal entity and that X did not carry its predecessor's regulatory obligations in Australia. Inman Grant, a former Twitter employee, welcomed Thursday's ruling. 'This judgment confirms the obligations to comply with Australian regulations still apply, regardless of a foreign company's merger with another foreign company,' she said in a statement. She said her agency would continue enforcing the Online Safety Act and 'holding all tech companies to account without fear or favor, ensuring they comply with the laws of Australia.' 'Without meaningful transparency, we cannot hold technology companies accountable,' she said. X lawyer Justin Quill said he had not yet read the appeals court judges' reasons and could not comment on the possibility of a High Court appeal. The High Court only hears around 10% of appeal applications, so the federal court full-bench decision could be final in X's case. X's media office did not immediately respond to an email request for comment on Thursday. In 2023, Inman Grant's office fined X 610, 500 Australian dollars ($385,000) for failing to fully explain how it tackled child exploitation content. X's response was considered incomplete or misleading. X refused to pay and the penalty is the subject of a separate and ongoing federal court case.

As Trump's tariff deadline looms, where do things stand on trade agreements?
As Trump's tariff deadline looms, where do things stand on trade agreements?

The Guardian

time3 hours ago

  • The Guardian

As Trump's tariff deadline looms, where do things stand on trade agreements?

The clock is ticking closer to Donald Trump's latest tariff deadline of 1 August, and while the president has been at pains to promote the agreements clinched with some major trading partners, many others are facing the prospect of no deal and increased levies on their exports to the Unites States. Dozens more are caught somewhere in the middle – with no trade deal signed, but as yet no threat of higher tariffs. Among them are some of America's closet allies and biggest trading partners, including Australia, Taiwan and New Zealand. After market turmoil led Trump to twice postpone the implementation of the higher tariffs, the president insisted on Wednesday that the 1 August deadline 'will not be extended' any further, promising it would be 'a big day for America.' However, Trump still faces a potential hurdle in the courts; hours before the new round of tariffs are due to come into effect on Friday, the US court of appeals for the federal circuit will hear arguments on whether the president even has the authority to impose the tariffs. For many of the countries without a deal facing the threat of crushing tariffs, the impasse appears to be rooted in politics as opposed to economics. Brazil is one of the few major economies with which the US runs a trade surplus – however earlier this month, Trump announced he would impose a 50% tariff on products sent from the country, tying the move to what he called a 'witch-hunt' trial against its former president, Jair Bolsonaro. Brazil's president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, has urged the US president to avoid creating a 'lose-lose' relationship between two of the largest economies in the Americas and said he did not fear publicly criticising Trump, whom he recently called an 'emperor'. Trump announced the US would impose a 25% tariff on goods from India plus an extra 'penalty' for the country buying arms and energy from Russia amid the war in Ukraine. While saying that Delhi was a 'friend,' Trump said the US had a 'massive' trade deficit with India and linked its 'vast' purchases of military equipment and energy from Russia to Vladimir Putin's war in Ukraine. Trump has threatened to impose a 30% tariff on Mexican goods, accusing the country of not doing enough to curb drug smuggling. Mexico is the largest trading partner of the US and president Claudia Sheinbaum has previously said she thought an agreement could be reached before the 1 August deadline. Canadian prime minister Mark Carney has said tariff negotiations would probably not conclude by 1 August – but Trump has threatened to impose a 35% tariff on imports not covered by the US-Mexico-Canada trade agreement. In March, Trump imposed a 25% tariff on cars and auto parts imported from Canada. In June he announced a 50% tariff on Canadian steel and aluminium imports. The new rate would apply to all other goods. On Wednesday, Trump said that Canada's decision to back statehood for Palestine would make it 'hard for us to make a trade deal with them.' US and Chinese negotiators have agreed to push back the deadline for escalating tariffs after talks this week failed to find a resolution across the many areas of dispute. China has taken an aggressive stance in response to Trump's threatened border taxes, retaliating with tariffs of its own on US goods and blocking the sale of vital rare earth metals and components used by American defence and hi-tech manufacturers. So far the US has completed eight framework deals which promise tariffs lower than the levels threatened if no deal was reached, but considerably higher than the rates imposed before Trump's second term began – meaning US consumers may face higher prices if companies pass the costs. While details remain to be negotiated, many of the countries concerned have made considerable concessions to the US. Trump announced on Wednesday that the US would impose a 15% tariff on imports from South Korea – after negotiations that were an early test for South Korean President Lee Jae Myung, who took office in June after a snap election. Trump said South Korea had agreed to invest $350bn in the United States in projects selected by the US and to purchase $100bn of liquefied natural gas and other energy products. A deal was reached on Sunday that includes a baseline US tariff of 15%, including to Europe's crucial automobile sector, pharmaceuticals and semiconductors. As part of the deal, the EU has agreed to purchase energy worth $750bn and make investments in the US, according to Trump. France's minister for Europe, Benjamin Haddad, said on Monday the agreement was 'unbalanced' and Germany's BDI business federation said the accord would have 'considerable negative repercussions.' Japan's exports to the US will be taxed at 15%, including automobiles, an industry accounting for 30% of Japanese exports to the US in 2024. Tariffs of 50% on Japanese steel and aluminium will continue to apply and the White House said that under the deal, Japan would make $550bn in investments in the US. Products from the Philippines, a major exporter of hi-tech items and apparel, will face a 19% levy. British products will be subject to a 10% base rate, with exceptions for some industries. The UK is still negotiating exemptions for its steel and aluminium products from the 25% rate in force. In return, the UK had to open its market further to US ethanol and beef, which has caused concern domestically. Vietnam reached a deal in early July with the US, its main export market for products including clothing and shoes. The deal will see its shipments subject to a 20% tariff, but a 40% tariff will be imposed on transshipments – goods manufactured in third countries that use Vietnam to circumvent steeper trade barriers. US goods will not face any tariffs entering Vietnam. Indonesian exports to the US will be taxed at 19% and, according to Washington, nearly all US goods will be able to enter Indonesia tariff free. Indonesia had already made other concessions earlier in July, pledging to buy more US oil and industrial goods. Pakistan – facing a potential 29% tariff on exports to the US – said on Thursday it had struck a deal that would result in lower tariffs, as well as an agreement in which Washington would help develop the country's oil reserves. With Agence France-Presse and the Associated Press

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store