| 
tenancy reporting
This
page considers Australian tenancy reporting and other
consumer reporting services.
It covers -
Please
note that we are not a tenancy reporting
service, do not act for any of the services and do not
conduct searches on behalf of tenants, consumers or property
owners.
 tenancy
services
As highlighted earlier in this profile, tenancy services
are commercial entities that maintain databases - often
referred to as residential tenancy databases (RTDs) -
about individuals renting domestic accommodation.
Practice varies from state to state, reflecting differing
housing markets, tenancy and fair trading legislation,
and state/territory privacy codes that preceded the federal
Privacy Act. The 2003 Tenancy Databases in the context
of Tenure Management: Risk Minimisation and Tenant Outcomes
in the Private Rental Sector (PDF)
report by the Australian Housing & Urban Research
Institute and Supply Side Dynamics in Private Rental
Housing: Some Thoughts on the Use of Rental Bond Data
(PDF)
by Gavin Wood, Judy Yates & Margaret Reynold suggest
that there has been significant growth and consolidation
within the industry over the past decade, with the first
major database commencing in 1987.
Guthrie's 2001 study (PDF)
suggests that growth reflected restrictions under Part
111 of the federal Privacy Act 1988, which specifically
prohibited real estate agents from access to an individual's
credit history through the use of credit databases. Large-scale
tenancy databases offered an effective - and arguably
under-regulated - mechanism for rapid tenant screening.
The major operators as of 2004 were -
-
Tenancy Information Centre Australasia (TICA)
- National
Tenancy Database (NTD),
formerly Remington White and Rent Check
- Barclay
MIS Group (BG)
- RP
Data
- Trading
Reference Australia (TRA),
formerly Tenant Reference Australia
- Australian
Property Owners Database (APOD)
- Console
- Tenant
Check
- Landlords
Advisory Service (LAC)
with
the first two having market dominance. In July 2007 Veda
Advantage agreed to acquire Australian Business Research
and the National Tenancy Database from Collection House
Limited for $32 million; that deal was completed in September
2007 after the ACCC declined to intervene. Veda Advantage
reported at that time that NTD had over one million tenant
records on file
As
with credit reference agencies, some operators provide
ancillary services such as debt collection, pricing and
property management software. Information on the databases
is supplied by subscribers to each service - typically
real estate agents and property managers. Access to most
of the databases is formally available only to registered
real estate agents or large property portfolio managers.
There have, however, been suggestions that there is substantial
leakage of data through subscribers to private enquiry
agents and other entities.
In 2004 the Federal Privacy Commissioner, in issuing four
complaint determinations under the federal Privacy Act,
commented
that
Having
a home is a very fundamental right and therefore it's
very important that all tenancy database operators have
exemplary information handling practices
If the rental sector believes that databases are an
important tool then it's essential that they are reliable.
If they are not accurate this could have negative results
for both landlords and tenants.
The
Commissioner noted that TICA Default Tenancy Control Pty
Ltd, operator of one of Australia's largest tenancy databases,
had breached the Act and ordered rectification of its
information handling practices. The Commissioner indicated
that TICA took 6 minutes at $5.45 per minute in calls
to identify whether it held information on individuals,
arguably in conflict with expectations that tenancy history
records are accurate, up to date and accessible for a
reasonable fee.
A Tenants' Union of Queensland spokesperson commented
that
the
exceptional number of breaches supports our view that
many of TICA's practices were unlawful. It is an outrage
that this behaviour has been able to continue for so
many years, unfairly disadvantaging many people from
accessing housing - a necessity of life. ... People
were being listed inaccurately because TICA did not
have adequate processes for verifying data and used
overlapping listing categories. Tenants were then charged
outrageous amounts if they rang TICA to find out if
they were listed - $5.45 per minute, equivalent to $327
per hour. In some cases tenants could be listed for
the terms of their natural lives and never get off the
database.
In
2006 a Victorian Law Reform Commission report (PDF)
recommended greater regulation of tenancy databases, commenting
that
National
regulation is needed to clean up unfair and trivial
entries on rental blacklists. Private companies get
information about tenants' rental histories from real
estate agents and compile it on databases that agents
then check before approving or refusing rental applications.
Some of the databases wipe off information after a set
time, but some entries are kept indefinitely. Tenants
who get a bad rating on these databases are effectively
barred from renting and may be unnecessarily forced
into emergency or public housing. ... Until national
regulation is achieved, the government should amend
the Victorian Residential Tenancies Act so tenants are
only listed on a database if a Victorian Civil and Administrative
Tribunal (VCAT) order is made against them. One in four
homes is rented, so this is an issue that affects thousands
of Victorians, either as renters or as landlords. Agents
have a legitimate need to minimise the risks associated
with renting out a property, but the secrecy shrouding
the current databases is inappropriate. Tenants should
know when they are listed and why. The Tenants Union
told us about people who have been listed on databases
for things their housemates or former partners have
done and others have been listed for disputes with agents
they thought had been resolved. Some database operators
charge $15 if tenants want to find a listing about themselves
and do not have to remove incorrect listings. We recommend
database operators provide reasonable access for people
who want to see their entry and real estate agents must
show database listings to tenants if they are refused
a tenancy. Database operators would be fined if they
list people who have not had a VCAT order made against
them and real estate agents could be fined for providing
incorrect information. Tenants would be able to get
listings removed from databases if they are false and
misleading, a dispute before VCAT has been resolved,
or VCAT has not made an order against them. We've recommended
that all listings should automatically expire after
three years and database operators who do not remove
the listings should be fined.
In
October 2006 the Residential Tenancy Database Working
Party of the Australian Standing Committee on Attorneys-General
(SCAG) and Ministerial Council on Consumer Affairs released
its report
on RTDs.
Given the prevalence and seriousness of abuses (and the
apparent unwillingness of the industry to grapple with
improvement in a meaningful way) it is perhaps not surprising
that the Working Party recommended development of a uniform
national approach to use of RTDs by real estate agents,
in particular model legislation for adoption by the states
and territories.
Its report outlines features of such legislation, including
an obligation to inform a tenants of the RTD process,
the need to clearly define events that justify a RTD listing
and the importance of enabling a tenant to access, correct
or dispute a listing, consistent with the principles underlying
the federal Privacy Act and Australia's consumer
protection regime.
hotels
Some businesses have discerned commercial opportunities
in what might be regarded as compilation of customer blacklists.
Guesttrax (an "Offender Tracking System for the Accommodation
Industry"), which attracted media attention in July
2007, targets the hotel and motel sectors, reportedly
providing information to 2,000 establishments. Its network
offers a description and other information regarding customers
who are alleged to have used dud cheques or credit cards,
to have stolen equipment or damaged premises.
Consumers are alerted at the time of registration that
information may be provided to Guesttrax; it is unclear
whether all consumers are fully aware of how such information
might be used (or misused) and the extent of access to
that information. Guesttrax is reported to have provided
information to fraud squads in South Australia, NSW and
Queensland.
Its promoter claims
that
GuestTRAX®
is THE ONLY LEGAL METHOD to advise other properties
of offenders, who are circulating around Australia,
within the accommodation sector.
The traditional "SKIPPER ALERT" that has been
in use for many years should not be used, unless you
want to leave yourself open to legal action, and attention
by the Privacy Commissioner.
other
Commercial blacklists are under development or in use
in other industries within Australia and New Zealand.
The discussion of ANPR elsewhere
on this site for example noted a commercial network for
petrol stations, with blacklisting of 'drive offs' (ie
where the driver leaves the station without paying).
next page
(insurance referencing)
|
Ketupa