Renters bubble wrap windows as Canberra shivers through winter

Our research found that rental properties were rated 0 at almost 10 times the rate of properties for sale. This is an issue that mainly affects people who rent.

If a home-owner is in an inefficient property, they can make structural improvements to it. This isn’t true for people who rent.

Better Renting That would likely be because many (most?) rental properties are more towards the centre of the city, because people renting have a preference to live in inner city areas, and those areas have most of the older houses, while a higher percentage of the housing in outer areas would be lived in by owners, and being newer housing, more likely to have a higher R rating. I drive down streets of older houses in inner areas, and by the condition of the gardens in many areas, a high percentage appear to be rented; whereas when I drive down streets in suburbs on the edge of Canberra, the gardens as a whole are so better cared for, indicating most are privately owned and lived in by the owner. Owners tend to look after gardens better than renters. So, the way you present the rating here, is unreliable and distort the facts. Owners who live in old houses in inner areas also are likely to live low R houses, while renters who live in newish houses, whether inner or out near the edge of Canberra are likely to live in houses with a higher R rating; in fact higher than live in owners in old inner city houses. So, tenants too have the choice to go and live in outer suburbs if they want a house with a higher R rating. Otherwise, they should be realistic, as should ‘Better Renting’ that old houses likely will have a lower R rating, as that is how they were built when they were built, and most renters prefer to live near the city, and the other benefits the location brings.

Julie Macklin this is an interesting idea, and one that we could look into in the future: that the energy efficiency of rental properties is lower because renters are more likely to live in areas with inefficient properties.

However, an initial look at the data suggests otherwise – you can see in this map that even in the same regions, rental properties are inefficient much more than properties for sale. For example, most rental properties in the Belconnen area are close to EER0, and you can also see this in the Weston/Woden area.

Julie Macklin I’m not sure its an inner city V outer city issue. I, like a number of my neighbours rent in Kambah in pretty basic accomodation. Most people I know who rent, are living in the outer suburbs of Canberra in pretty basic housing from the 70s and 80s. I would have thought the majority of inner city renters are in apartments with higher EER than the houses of Tuggers and Belco outer suburbia?

I see what you are showing, but I would like to see a bit more detail. Showing the R rating of a house from 0.49 to 4.49 is too wide. The rental properties in the newer areas of Gungahlin appear to have a similar R rating to houses for sale, so if tenants want a house with a higher R rating, then perhaps they should look in Gungahlin.
Please don’t get me wrong, I do want houses to be more energy efficient, but demanding present owners of rental properties should have to spend thousands of dollars (which some might struggle to find) to upgrade their rentals is unfair. A fairer demand would be to insist that a buyer of a house needs to bring the house up to a minimum standard, whether that house was to be an investment property or owner lived in. That way, the housing stock would gradually improve, without putting a financial burden on present owners. I also said the buyer of a house, rather than the seller, as that way the cost of bringing the house R rating higher, could be incorporated into how much they expect to pay, and they will be the ones who will get the benefit, not the seller. It might of course, lower the sale value of some older badly insulated homes, but not necessarily all, as for some prime inner suburban areas, it’s more the land value than what house is on the block that matters.
In the late 1970s or early 1980s I belonged to a group that advocated houses be built to a higher energy efficiency and along with other members of the group we wrote submissions about this and sent them to relevant authorities. Everything we wrote, as far I could tell, was dismissed. Then, some of Belconnen, some of Tuggeranong and none of Gungahlin had been built. It is horrifying to think of all that time that was wasted while houses were continued to be built to low energy standards, and while our sensible suggestions were absolutely and completely ignored and dismissed.
On a personnel side to this issue I have both rented and rented out a property. The places I rented varied from warm to freezing. However, the cold places had cheap rent and this compensated for the lack of insulation. They were older houses. I don’t abdicate this for modern housing; Insulation exists and houses can be orientated towards the sun. Houses can be built for the Canberra climate that require almost no heating. I now live in one, and last night, after the warm sunny day, my house needed no heating.
When I rented out, initially rooms in my house and later a separate house, they were not well insulated houses, neither the house I lived in (the coldest of the two), or the rental. If I still had that rental, I would find it offensive that you would demand that I improved the energy efficiency of the rental property, somehow seeming to think I lived in warm luxury, when in fact my own house was worse than the rental property. So no I didn’t expect the tenants to live in colder conditions than I was willing; was living in. Besides, the rent was very cheap, taking in the condition of the house. I also would have struggled to find money to improve the insulation for the rental property that you are demanding. (Not all owners of rentals are rich.) And it would have been a waste to spend this money on a house that in a few years was to be placed on the back of a truck and removed. In fact, if I had had to find the money to improve the rental property, it would have been harder for me to replace it with the energy efficient house. So, demanding I spend a lot of money upgrading the rental, might have meant one less high example of an energy efficient house would have been built. What you think are simple demands, can have complicated results.
Sorry for the long reply, and I can fully understand why most people won’t read it, but it annoys me this suggestion of yours to force owners of rental properties to spend money upgrading rental properties. If you want houses improved demand that houses when they are sold should then be brought up to minimal standards. That would be fairer and both tenants and live in owners would then benefit, not only tenants. It would also have a flow on effect then to present housing stock, especially the rentals, as more houses were upgraded as they changed hands and then some of those were rented, it would improve the housing rental stock and make the longer owned uninsulated housing stock less attractive, and begin to force the owners of them to either upgrade them if they wanted to find tenants and be able to charge a good rent, or sell the houses…which would then be done up too by the new owner.

Julie Macklin Well I read your long response and I thought you made some good points. In my experience, many of the government regulations designed to improve rental conditions in Canberra have ultimately led to weekly price increases which impacts on the less well off and particularly lifelong renters at the lower end of the market.

You say that people renting are mostly in more central older neighbourhoods and this is why they have poor insulation but say that the cold houses have low rent. Central is not lower rent! You also question if owners should pay out for insulation because of cost but don’t consider the huge amount that renters in properties with poor insulation need to pay for heating and cooling. It would cost owners less to insulate than it will renters paying out extra power expenses overly a lifetime. Insulation is also far better environmentally.

What I mean by inner areas, can extend out to some of Belconnen and past Woden; basically houses that were built before higher standards re insulation were introduced. The rentals in Gungahlin should have higher R ratings, because those houses have been built since R ratings were introduced, so perhaps more people renting should be looking to rent there. You talk about living in a house for a lifetime. I lived in an almost uninsulated fibro cottage in Narrabundah for about 30 years, so I do know about living in cold houses. I found frozen water inside. There were R% 1.5 batts in the ceiling, but none in the walls, so the heat went straight through the thin plaster and then straight through the thin fibro. The floor was also uninsulated. We mostly only heated one room to save cost and turned off all heating when we went to bed. Our bill for three people was less than many others told us their bills were. We got by. The others were tenants, and many lived there for years, so they were able to live with the conditions too. If not, they would have moved come the first winter, but they didn’t. I never thought to waste money on that house, as it was not worth it. I put on a jumper, coat if need be, woolly hat, and saved the money until I could afford a well built house. If I hadn’t been meaning to build a house I would have packed up and moved years before. Perhaps people who find themselves in too cold a rental property should think about moving to areas of Canberra where houses are likely to have better R ratings, such a Gungahlin, and the tram is very nice :). I have ridden it myself a couple of times when visiting Gungahlin, despite not living near it. I later also had another house which I rented for seven years. If I had done that house up and put in insulation I likely could have got another $100 or more a week in rent. Better houses in my area where getting another $100 to $150 a week in rent. Do you want to pay another $100 or more in rent a week? That’s what will happen if owners are forced to spend thousands of dollars on the house.

Susan Allin that’s incredibly disappointing!

Agree. Same thing happened to me a few years ago. Never bothered showing up. Had to do it myself.

Were you using all those rooms at once? Until a few years ago I lived in a very cold house, and we only heated one room at a time to save money; the one we were in. The thermostat was set to 18C, but sitting down the air temperature was likely closer to 15C. That way the electricity bill never blew out. However, I now live in an energy efficient house and I am sitting here with no heater on.

Julie Macklin well it was concrete and brick so we had to leave heaters on for a few hours in each room to heat it up. 2 bedrooms and the living room.
Brick/cement really absorbs the cold and holds onto it!
My new place is 3 levels and gets full sun in winter. I only turn the heater on cloudy days below 10 and subzero nights. Even then its on 16-18 degrees!
My most recent bill last week was $400. Thats daily use of heater, dryer, washing machine, dishwasher. Gas cooking and water

Materials such as concrete and brick need big windows on the north to let in the sun and then the sun heats the mass. They are great at stabilising the temperature and in the summer also keep the house cooler. I now live in an energy efficient house made of concrete and I am sitting here at 11.30 at night with no heater on. Yes, wearing a jumper, but don’t need a heater. My last bill for electricity use was $186. Before this I lived in a fibro house with no insulation in the walls. The heat went straight through them and out. I have found ice inside that house.

Julie Macklin yeah it sat under a huge tree and didn’t get any sun lol

Jan Gottwald cause your hard

Liam Rowley ahaha😀 same situation for you big fella

Jan Gottwald as long as it’s not windy its pretty alright

Liam Rowley fair enough. But honestly winter is nothing this year

SJ Killer if you believe this is a freezing winter, what did you think about the winters a couple years ago when there was actual frost every morning without fail on the windscreen. Must of felt like Siberia to you

June Kirk true, I just left a 5 yo apartment. It was so hot in summer, there was a aircon unit in the living room, but the bedroom had nothing, and no opening windows! It faces the sun and we had to sleep in the living room many nights! Cheap shitty build with no thought for the temperature.
I was very careful choosing to buy my townhouse and I’m glad I did. I chose something new and spent 100 grand more than the option of an older home.

Anna Kay That is just awful Anna, I’ve heard similar stories from people and the fact that these properties passed original plans and final habitable approval is seriously wrong. So pleased you have been careful with buying your own home, very sensible, congratulations and I bet you are enjoying it in all weather 😊

Tan Choi Heng only the best ✌

Michelle Preston so what is the solution and who is going to pay?

Ashley Wright appears each to their own.

It is not the responsibility of the landlord to supply heating or cooling.

Dave Phillips Very true, but it will rain again. “Of drought and flooding rains.”🙂

Tracy Robinson disagree with the profit before people thing.

The biggest problem is the customers who pay for these new houses prioritise other things over things like you mentions.

Dave Phillips I see your point, but things like installing proper insulation should be law.
It seems that being an apparent environmentally conscientious Government and making change is only good for votes and on paper 📝

Steve Hegs That’s good to good to know.

Tracy Robinson I agree. Double glazing and efficient heating/cooling should be the norm.

Steve Hegs very true and they do. But you don’t need solar and double glazing to get 6 stars.

We think that all properties should be more energy efficient, and the government is in fact already supporting home owners in this area. But renting is different because (a) there are far more inefficient properties in the rental sector, (b) renters can’t make improvements themselves, and (c) an investment property is a business and it’s reasonable for the customer to expect a healthy and safe home.

Penelope Smithers same, I was thinking they were meth labs

Elmie Jvr hahah I could have told them that years ago!

Elmie yeahhhh, it’s wasn’t the warmest of houses that’s for sure

Chris MacDonald landlords can’t have it both ways, you could also reduce the ACT public service which is massive and accounts for the increase in living costs in the ACT……

Mario Vozella and many of those same staff are also renters. So they lose their jobs therefore can’t pay rent so rents go down? 🤔 is this your theory?

Reduce not obliterate, drive efficiency through performance bonuses 👍

But it’s okay for the landlord to freeze in their house, but can’t allow the tenant to. Many house owners are not rich you know. I used to have a rental property that was cold in winter. However, my own house was even worse. So, I didn’t expect my tenant to live in any worse condition than what I was living in. The cheap rent took into consideration the condition of the house.

Julie Macklin many, many more rental properties are inefficient than properties for sale (43% compared with 4.5%). It’s also different because a home-owner can improve their property, whereas people who rent can’t make structural improvements.

Becky Boo wouldn’t do much for the view 🙄

June Kirk no it doesn’t but I’ve used it i my sons bedroom window that look out directly at a corrugated fence anyway, so it makes no difference there.

I have used that plastic film in windows too.