Who signs a $1.7 million house lease?

Stuff reports:

The luxury rental had a movie room, a pool, a fountain and a wine room.

But after signing a five-year lease, the tenants discovered the $6500/week property was poorly maintained, had water that was not fit to drink, and an “overbearing” owner who kept texting about the fish in the fishpond.

To make matters worse, the tenants began struggling to pay the rent after the head tenant’s business collapsed, forcing him to rely on his parents to cover his living expenses.

Putting aside for now the poor maintenance, I want focus on that the tenants committed to a $1.68 million house lease over five years. That is a massive amount of money, and I would have thought the only people who would sign such a lease would be those who actually had that cash in hand, or close to it.

In February, the tenants asked for a $5000 monthly rent reduction. The landlord agreed, but a week later, the tenants moved out, owing several thousand dollars in rent.

The main tenant told the tribunal his business had gone into liquidation. He had no assets or savings, and he was relying on his parents to pay his rent and living expenses.

His flatmate had only been living at the house part time, and was paying rent elsewhere.

Again who would sign such a long term and expensive lease, without any assets or savings. It is reckless. I can only assume they have very wealthy parents.

While Smith found the tenants were responsible for $70,000 in rent arrears, he deducted nearly $19,000 in compensation and exemplary damages for the owner’s failure to maintain and repair.

After applying the $25,000 bond, the tenants were ordered to pay their landlord $28,000. The adjudicator also agreed to cut their rental term to March 2025.

They are lucky it was cut so short.