REPRIEVE: Hamilton residents Steve Denshire and Melina Vargas, who were contesting a vacant possession notice at the tenancy tribunal. The couple can remain at their home after being offered a new lease. Picture: Max Mason-HubersA couple who took a real estate agencyto thestate’s tenancy tribunal after being told to move out of their home just two days after reporting unsafe asbestos removal have been given a reprieve, settlingthe dispute before atribunal hearing.
Hamilton resident Steve Denshire and his partner, Melina Vargas, were toldin May to vacate theproperty they were leasing throughLeah Jay Hamilton on the day theywere due to sign a renewal of their lease for another12 months.
Mr Denshire told the Newcastle Heraldin Junethe sudden vacant possession notice they received came just two days after he reported the unsafe removal of asbestos from theirproperty.
A contractor supplied through the real estate,which Mr Denshire hadsought credential assurances about before the work took place, removed an asbestos roof from a backyard toilet.
Mr Denshire, a self-employed carpenter,said correct safety procedures were not followed and he made a report to Safe Work NSW.
READ MORE:Hamilton couple to lose home after reporting asbestos concerns
Two days later, aSafe Work NSW compliance officer phoned and spoke with the landlord about adhering to the code of conduct.
Within less than an hour of that callthe couple received a vacant possession notice from the real estate agency, Mr Denshire saidin June.
The real estate agency told the couple the reason for the notice was that the landlord wanted to move in.
But, skepticalof the timing of the notice, Mr Denshire took the incident to the NSWCivil and AdministrativeTribunal.
The couple were initially told to move out of the propertybyAugust 2, just days before they were expecting their first child.
With the hearing then scheduled for early August, Mr Denshire said the stress tookits toll on the couple.
“We got it [the hearing] prolonged until next month because of the baby coming,” Mr Denshire said. “It wasn’t appropriate.”
Howeverthe landlord, through Leah Jay Hamilton, recently offered the couple a new lease.
First offering them a six-month option, before negotiations led to an 11-month and one-week lease.
“It’s from the original date that it was supposed to be signed on,” Mr Denshire said.
“So it’s basically three weeks short if this didn’t happen.
“They’ve also given us a clause that we can move out whenever we want and there’ll be no lease-break penalty.”
Mr Denshire said the incident should be an example for other renters.
“I think the rental community feels disempowered in these sortof events,” he said.
“You can stand up for yourself and there is the process there to support renters.
“Hopefully more people feel like they can do something if there’s an injustice done.”