Queensland landlord loses thousands trying to evict ‘good tenants’

A Queensland landlord has lost thousands of dollars when he tried to evict tenants from his property, only to discover his agent had accidentally sent them a lease renewal notice without his consent.

Truck salesman Adam Le Fevre owned an investment property in Mackay in North Queensland and his nightmare began when he decided to sell the house last year.

Mr Le Fevre told Daily Mail Australia he used his pension to buy the property in the hope it would lead to a comfortable retirement.

‘I bought it at a time when the Reserve Bank governor said there will be no rate hikes for the next two years.

“And lo and behold, twelve or thirteen consecutive rate increases brought the real estate to a point where it could no longer cover itself. I made the reasonable decision to discharge.”

He informed his leasing agent in late 2023 of his decision to sell the property and not send a lease renewal notice.

Mr Le Fevre subsequently received a contract for the sale of the property on January 25, with settlement scheduled for April 17, a month after the tenant’s original lease was due to end.

“The plan was for the lease to expire on March 14 so they had enough time to move out. The lease was up and technically it should have worked fine.”

However, he later discovered that his leasing agent had accidentally sent the tenants a lease extension in January, extending their lease for another year.

“So they signed it. They sent it back and told me the agent signed it too. And I was furious, absolutely furious.”

The agent attempted to terminate the lease by emailing the tenants and then issued a notice to vacate in early February, specifying that the tenants must vacate the property by April 11.

“An email has been sent to the tenants explaining the legal reasons for the termination of the lease,” the agent wrote in an email to Mr Le Fevre and his selling agent.

Tenants still refuse to leave even though a notice of termination has been issued

By April 11, the tenants had still not left, and Mr. Le Fevre and the agent sent the tenants an ‘official notice to vacate’, dictating that the tenants must be gone by April 11.

As a last resort, Mr Le Fevre applied to the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal for an ‘possession order’.

Mr Le Fevre said the hearing had been scheduled for May 1 and the tenants were asking for a postponement, with the next hearing on May 8. This was successful on May 14.

‘The tenants were only able to leave the building on May 17.’

That’s what the rental agent said ABC they ‘acted in accordance with legal requirements… and according to the client’s legal instructions.’

Mr Le Fevre said he was “frustrated and dismayed” by the eviction process, saying there is a balance of power that heavily favors tenants.

“That imbalance is tipped over the edge by the laws, or the inability to take action against a tenant who has overstayed, to get them out. ‘

Due to the delay in moving the tenants out of his property, Mr Le Fevre is now facing breach of contract action from the new owners.

‘They sold their property and had to move, so they were in temporary accommodation. They are seeking reimbursement for the costs of pet storage and kennels.”

Mr Le Fevre said he could be awarded damages of up to $8,000.

He has also had to cover the costs of flights between Brisbane and Mackay, as well as legal fees, which he said amount to about $7,000.

Landlord expresses tenant’s unwillingness to vacate

Mr Le Fevre claimed the reason the tenants had not left was because they could not find a suitable alternative property.

“I understand it’s difficult, but when you look at the available rental market in Mackay, there are a large number of properties that you know are suitable for all types of tenants.”

He thought they were too picky.

‘The problem is when a tenant decides that he only wants to live in the suburb he is currently in, and that the house has to be suitable for his dog, suitable for his children and close to the school. so they can walk to school. Your options become a little less.’

Mr Le Fevre said during research he did at the time that there were many rental properties available at the time of the eviction.

“So you know, it’s not like they were scraping by, and they might have been challenged to get to that amount per week, but at the $550 to $700 per week mark there were no less than 30 to 40 properties available on the market .’

Even though they did not comply with the eviction request, Mr. Le Fevre noted that they were still good tenants.

‘The tenants have never been in arrears in payments at any time. At no point were they disrespectful or causing damage to the property beyond normal wear and tear.

“They were good tenants on all sides until the moment came when they were asked to leave.”

As someone who rents himself out, Mr Le Fevre said he would never consider exceeding a lease.

He talked about a previous experience where, as a tenant, he had received a notice to leave.

‘And not for a moment did I say: can I milk this for how long? Or no, I’m not staying. Or I can’t find a place to live.’

‘Yes, it’s a challenge to find a place to live, but you know. You gotta do what you gotta do.”

He said that contrary to popular belief that landlords are wealthy, he does not even own his own home.

“I could retire comfortably today, no problem, but I would have to die on Friday. I don’t feel that comfortable.’