Inquiry into the provision and regulation of supported accommodation in Queensland
Submission No: 30
Submitted by: Sunnycove Maroochydore
Publication: Making the submission and your name public
Attachments: See attachment
Submitter Comments:
SUNNYCOVE
MAROOCHYDORE
Inquiry into the Provision and Regulation of Supported Accommodation in Queensland
Community Support and Services Committee
Wednesday, 17 January 2024
To whom it may concern,
We are the owners of the management rights for Sunnycove Maroochydore Retirement Village located at 26 Yinni Street, Maroochydore, Queensland. This is an accredited Residential Service Level 2 facility and we are responsible for obtaining the accreditation and complying with the associated legislation under our management rights agreement. We understand that this inquiry is mainly concerned about Residential Service Level 3, however, felt it is worth putting a submission on the basis that we feel that our business is in the minority in terms of its structure (Property that is strata titled with a body corporate, strata manager and us as the management rights owner). Any changes to the Residential Service Legislation should consider the impact on small business operators such as ourselves.
We understand and agree with the Residential Service legislation and the spirit behind what it is trying to achieve as it related to us. We are providing a safe and secure accommodation for senior citizens who are unable to afford to purchase\lease into other accommodation options and to provide a meal service to our residents. Our retirement village is not viewed as a temporary accommodation option. All our residents, whether they are owner occupier or a rental tenant, want to reside for as long as they can.
We are also governed by our Body Corporate that is investor dominated (25:3 investor vs owner occupied) and the requirements of our real estate license (a requirement to own and operate a management rights business) that requires us to act in the best interest of the owner when it comes to dealing with the tenants of our retirement village. The legislations have conflicting priorities when it comes to dealing with residents.
For example, investor owners are mainly concerned about the return on their investment and with the current state of the rental market and cost of living inflation, are wanting to push the rent charged higher than the rate the aged pension is going up which is the only source of income most of our tenants have. It means that we can no longer be an accommodation option for those solely relying on the aged pension as their income and can indirectly result in our residents having to move out or, more likely to cut back on the meal service to save money rather than eat properly. This goes against the spirit of the Residential Service legislation.
The Residential Service legislation requires that we provide a service to resolve disputes\complaints\grievances between residents. If the dispute is between a tenant and an owner occupier, we cannot take any meaningful action with an owner occupier and the only recourse would be to evict the tenant, even if that party is not at fault, as the only permanent way to resolve a dispute. Often, the motive of one party in a dispute is to get the other party evicted.
MAROOCHYDORE
With disputes\complaints\grievances, we are the only authority in the matter and there is no pathway to escalate the matter to a higher authority other than to call the police because the matter sometimes does escalate to the point that the parties start acting illegally. When it is with an owner occupier or with a tenant whose owner has not appointed us to manage the rental property, there is not any meaningful way for us to exercise authority in that matter. We do not receive any support to resolve disputes\complaints\grievances — no financial compensation, no training, and no higher authority we can engage to provide advice and\or adjudicate and enforce an action. It makes the process of handling disputes\complaints\grievances a best effort model and is only as effective as the willingness of the person managing the dispute to put in the effort to manage it fairly.
The meal service is at the discretion of the provider. It can be as bad or as good as the provider desires and there is not a meaningful authority providing accountability or pathway for complaint or a method to compare the meal service to other meal services to know whether it is relatively good or bad. We believe we provide an above average in quality and value meal service, however, are not able to show objective evidence of that because there is not a way to compare with other similar meal service providers. It is frustrating especially with the relatively rapid increase in food costs recently. Do we lower the quality of our meal service so that we can provide a cheaper option for our residents or do we maintain quality and increase the price? Those residents that can afford it, want quality maintained and those that cannot want a cheaper option. Providing multiple meal service options means increased operating costs for us and being a small business, these changes that a larger organisation may be able to absorb, affects our viability to continue.
That concludes our submission. We are happy to provide further details\information if required.
Yours sincerely,
Matthew and Lucy Lo Management Rights owners and Onsite managers Sunnycove Maroochydore Retirement Village