The shocking $1,000 hidden fee targeting Aussie renters – are you next?
- Replies 4
Renting a home has never been straightforward, and it seems things are only getting more complicated.
New trends in rental payment options are sparking outrage among tenants, with many feeling the pressure of hidden costs and inconvenient systems.
Here’s a closer look at what’s causing frustration and why renters are starting to push back.
An Australian tenant is voicing her frustration after receiving a 'shocking' message from her new real estate agency.
Jessica, a 34-year-old resident of Sydney, recently found out that her current agency had merged with another, offering her a range of new payment options for her $800 fortnightly rent.
However, each option came with a fee or surcharge, potentially costing her close to $1,000 more per year.
The only fee-free method, Jessica explained, was inconvenient, to say the least—it required setting up a new account and BSB number every fortnight.
This meant she would have to manually enter these details each time, rather than set up a recurring payment like most renters prefer.
'I read through it and just got more and more irritated as I saw the charges they were trying to tack on to our rent, which is already very high,' Jessica said.
'We've been in our property for three and a half years, always paid our rent on time. There have been no issues. So it almost feels like a bit of a low blow.'
Jessica’s other payment options included:
Jessica pointed out that manually changing account details every payment cycle made her vulnerable to errors, potentially leading to payment issues and risking eviction.
'There's so much more room for error when you have to manually change account details every single time,' Jessica said.
'Which is more likely to pop me in arrears if I send it to the wrong place, which puts me at risk of eviction, which is not ideal, or being out of a substantial amount of money while we try to trace where it went.'
'Everything's becoming so automated, which I'm not opposed to, I think automation is great in some cases, but I also think that when you're then passing the buck onto people who are just trying to rent a property, you shouldn't have to pay extra for convenience.'
Jessica worries that these types of payment changes could become standard if tenants don't push back.
This move by Jessica's agency is part of a larger trend emerging in Australian real estate. One tenant shared that their agency’s bank had scrapped direct debit services, forcing them to use a third-party app for payments.
Watch her video here:
Joel Dignam, executive director of Better Renting, a group advocating for fair rental conditions, explained that these new systems can cause serious problems for tenants.
'Most renters are perfectly happy to do a bank transfer and forget about it,' he said. 'I think for property managers, some of these systems just make the reconciliation of money simpler for them.'
'I imagine there are times when a tenant maybe pays rent, they forget to put in a reference code, or slightly the wrong amount, or maybe they use a different set of details and that would create inconvenience for the property management company,’ he added.
He finished with, “'But breaking news, that's their job. They're paid to manage the tenancy. They're charging fees to do that job. And that's what the landlord is paying them for.'
Dignam commended Jessica for standing up to the new payment rules and encouraged other renters to do the same.
'I think renters should push back, and, in many cases, are on strong legal grounds to push back,' Dignam explained. 'They should be making it more difficult for agents to try out this option.'
Dignam argued that needing to input new details every fortnight is unreasonable.
'This is an area where it's clearly indefensible,' he said. 'It's clearly just exploiting someone's lack of power. And if these businesses are terrible and if their product is actually good, then let people choose to use it, instead of forcing them to it.'
New South Wales, Queensland, and Victoria have laws ensuring tenants always have access to a fee-free payment option or a method that is 'reasonably' or 'easily' accessible. However, Dignam noted that laws across Australia might need to be updated to counter these practices.
As rental payment options continue to evolve, it’s clear that tenants need to stay informed and proactive. What do you think about these new fees and payment systems? Have you experienced similar issues? Share your thoughts and stories in the comments below.
New trends in rental payment options are sparking outrage among tenants, with many feeling the pressure of hidden costs and inconvenient systems.
Here’s a closer look at what’s causing frustration and why renters are starting to push back.
An Australian tenant is voicing her frustration after receiving a 'shocking' message from her new real estate agency.
Jessica, a 34-year-old resident of Sydney, recently found out that her current agency had merged with another, offering her a range of new payment options for her $800 fortnightly rent.
However, each option came with a fee or surcharge, potentially costing her close to $1,000 more per year.
The only fee-free method, Jessica explained, was inconvenient, to say the least—it required setting up a new account and BSB number every fortnight.
This meant she would have to manually enter these details each time, rather than set up a recurring payment like most renters prefer.
'I read through it and just got more and more irritated as I saw the charges they were trying to tack on to our rent, which is already very high,' Jessica said.
'We've been in our property for three and a half years, always paid our rent on time. There have been no issues. So it almost feels like a bit of a low blow.'
Jessica’s other payment options included:
- Direct debit, which came with a $1.95 surcharge per transaction
- Card payments, which would attract a 1.9 per cent plus 30 cent fee per transaction
- EFT Wallet, costing $2.50 per transaction
- Australia Post, which charged $5 per transaction
Jessica pointed out that manually changing account details every payment cycle made her vulnerable to errors, potentially leading to payment issues and risking eviction.
'There's so much more room for error when you have to manually change account details every single time,' Jessica said.
'Which is more likely to pop me in arrears if I send it to the wrong place, which puts me at risk of eviction, which is not ideal, or being out of a substantial amount of money while we try to trace where it went.'
'Everything's becoming so automated, which I'm not opposed to, I think automation is great in some cases, but I also think that when you're then passing the buck onto people who are just trying to rent a property, you shouldn't have to pay extra for convenience.'
Jessica worries that these types of payment changes could become standard if tenants don't push back.
This move by Jessica's agency is part of a larger trend emerging in Australian real estate. One tenant shared that their agency’s bank had scrapped direct debit services, forcing them to use a third-party app for payments.
Watch her video here:
Joel Dignam, executive director of Better Renting, a group advocating for fair rental conditions, explained that these new systems can cause serious problems for tenants.
'Most renters are perfectly happy to do a bank transfer and forget about it,' he said. 'I think for property managers, some of these systems just make the reconciliation of money simpler for them.'
'I imagine there are times when a tenant maybe pays rent, they forget to put in a reference code, or slightly the wrong amount, or maybe they use a different set of details and that would create inconvenience for the property management company,’ he added.
He finished with, “'But breaking news, that's their job. They're paid to manage the tenancy. They're charging fees to do that job. And that's what the landlord is paying them for.'
Dignam commended Jessica for standing up to the new payment rules and encouraged other renters to do the same.
'I think renters should push back, and, in many cases, are on strong legal grounds to push back,' Dignam explained. 'They should be making it more difficult for agents to try out this option.'
Dignam argued that needing to input new details every fortnight is unreasonable.
'This is an area where it's clearly indefensible,' he said. 'It's clearly just exploiting someone's lack of power. And if these businesses are terrible and if their product is actually good, then let people choose to use it, instead of forcing them to it.'
New South Wales, Queensland, and Victoria have laws ensuring tenants always have access to a fee-free payment option or a method that is 'reasonably' or 'easily' accessible. However, Dignam noted that laws across Australia might need to be updated to counter these practices.
As rental payment options continue to evolve, it’s clear that tenants need to stay informed and proactive. What do you think about these new fees and payment systems? Have you experienced similar issues? Share your thoughts and stories in the comments below.
.png){kind=icon}
).
