Victorian Retirement Village Act Proposed Cost Transparent Definition.
Victorian Retirement Village Legislation Flawed - Long time advocate for reforms to the Victorian Retirement Village Act 1986 Charles Adams says the Victorian Retirement Village Legislation is fundamentally flawed. Flawed by not allowing residential tenancy contracts with monthly rentals as the mandatory standard legislated definition of a retirement village, with other contract models only available as options.
He believes it should be mandatory for retirement village operators to offer all prospective residents’ residential tenancy contracts alongside the more traditional loan/lease, deferred management fee' style contract. Loan/Lease hides contract costs until months after the contract is terminated, making that model opaque.
See also:- http://www.retvill.net/retirement-village-legislative-reforms/
In a submission to the Minister for Consumer Affairs, The Shadow Minister and the spokesperson for the Greens Party, Charles states:-
"The No.1 Victorian legislative reform required is a change to the current requirement that to enter a retirement village you must pay an in-going contribution and that contribution cannot be classified as rent.
The requirement for an inclusive rental price (residential tenancy) is the only known contract that provides the transparent cost rate at entry, necessary for cost comparison, and free market competition."
The fairer definition proposed for a Retirement Village.
- Retirement village means a group of leased, with secure tenure, dwellings, forming a community, the majority of which is retired persons, with all services for the common property included in the rental price.
- Residential tenancy contracts, with monthly rentals are mandatory. Other contract models may only be offered as an option.
Given the revelations that surrounded retirement villages during 2016 and 2017, Charles believes now is the time to act on the legislated definition of a retirement village. "This proposed change has the capacity to provide transparency to retirees as to the actual cost of residential accommodation within a retirement village unlike the current deferred management fee model."
"So long as the present biased definition continues, people will continue to be hampered by the lack of free market competition in the retiree downsizing market, and some trapped by extraordinarily high exit costs."
[blog_subscription_form]
I salute Charles Adams for his actions against this Victorian Gov’t legislation. High time this was reviewed and objected to by the people of this country. Thanks to yourself ‘Breasley’ and Mr Adams for helping us.
ReplyDeleteJudyW.
Hello Judy, Thank you for your comments. Charles a long term retirement village resident has been campaigning on this issue for over 10 years, he may be closer than ever to getting someone to take notice. Of course there are powerful commercial forces pushing against him, the industry will fight hard to defend this in-going payment 'deferred management fee' business model. Over my 10 years in a retirement village I have seen, experienced, or been the victim of the paper tiger approach of Consumer Affairs Victoria. Suffered the intimidation of an operator over multiple issues I have raised on behalf of myself and/or other residents. Won a case in VCAT that forced the operator to refund $300,000.00 to the residents for charging a fee over a 10+ year period that was deemed contrary to the provisions of the Act. The residents committee where I live has just carried a motion of 'no confidence' in the recording of the minutes of the Residents Annual General Meeting after multiple years of problems with the minutes. This of course is simply life in a retirement village for some, not everyone, but certainly for some. Unfortunately the deferred management fee model moves us all closure to a position where we cannot make a U-turn because of the fee, loss of earnings on the refundable amount, the impact of inflation on the 'present day value' of the refundable amount, exit fees etc. We speak out because change must come and only by speaking out will anyone with the capacity to bring about that change take notice. Les. (Breasly)
ReplyDelete