A real estate agent has called out landlords for raising rents to match the rising costs of property ownership.

Madeleine Cahill, the owner of boutique Victorian real estate agency Sonder, opened up about a recent conversation she had with a client who wanted to raise his rent above the appraisal range.

Ms Cahill said she had already appraised his property at $600 to $650 in rent per week, but was met with pushback by the owner, who said he needed to charge more to make the asset “worthwhile”.

“He said to me, ‘Madeleine, I need $700 per week in rent for this property to stack up for me,” she said on social media.

“He said to me, ‘By the time I factor in the mortgage, the council rates, the water rates, the building insurance, the landlord insurance policy, I need $700 per week minimum in order for this property to be worthwhile.”

Ms Cahill, who has been working in property for 15 years, said she often heard this story from clients.

But in a pointed message to property owners, she insisted that higher rates and increased bills were not good enough reasons to increase the rent. 

“I think we (property managers) hear this ten times a day, and this is where the conversation kind of gets a bit tough,” she said. 

“The reality is that the market is the market, and at the end of the day, what you want for the property is irrelevant. 

“The property is worth what someone is willing to pay for it.

“The fact that interest rates are on the rise, the fact that your interest rates are a lot higher than they used to be, the fact that your insurance premium has gone up by 20 per cent are not relevant factors when it comes to determining what your rent is.

“And here’s the other side of it – at the end of the day, we are in a cost-of-living crisis, and that is affecting everybody, particularly renters.

“So rents are being scrutinised more than ever before.”

She explained that accepting a slightly lower weekly rate was better than the home sitting on the market for months, and receiving no payments at all.

“It’s moments like these that I prefer to let the math do the talking and just demonstrate to the client that if they go to the market at $700 per week and it sits there empty for a month doing nothing, that’s a month’s worth of rent not in their pocket,” she said.

“Compared to if they had just gone on at a more conservative price and rented it within seven days.”

According to Ms Cahill, property owners were better off “taking a look at what you are going to achieve across an annual period versus that weekly rental amount”.

“It can make all the difference in seeing how much you stand to lose chasing those few extra dollars every week.”

Commenters backed Ms Cahill’s take, expressing their frustration with having to pay off someone else’s “long-term investment” costs. 

“Renters are not supposed to be paying all of your bills,” one commenter wrote. 

“Property is an investment. Sometimes you lose out. I wish owners would realise that.”

“Renters aren’t a bottomless bucket of cash. We are over maxed out,” wrote another.

“If you buy a rental and you can’t absorb the increases, then get rid of it…We are trying to survive as well.”

A third person commented: “It’s an investment… there’s meant to be input to build wealth. Long-term investment becomes an asset that you own.

“Why should renters pay for this? If renters can afford all the mortgage costs, rates, insurance, etc they would be doing this on their own property.”

“It’s not fair that homeowners get to use renters to pay their mortgage and rates,” commented a fourth. 

Read related topics:Inflation