VCAT member Vivienne Topp invalidated a notice to vacate issued by HousingFirst on the basis that the amount alleged to be owed was unclear and the notice was therefore illegal. The decision came after a heated hearing where the tenant, who had been paying $234 a week, argued that the $65 increase had not been formally communicated.
HousingFirst, which took over several inner‑east Melbourne properties from the former Glenloch trust in 2023, justified the hike by citing low and inconsistent rents in those homes. In a statement, a HousingFirst representative said the increase was meant to align the properties with the organisation's broader community‑housing policy, which caps rent at 30 % of household income.
Shane McGrath of the Housing for the Aged Action Group told the tribunal that the elderly tenant believed a formal notice of rent increase was required. Because she continued to pay the original amount, McGrath argued that she was not in arrears when HousingFirst issued the eviction notice.
Topp’s ruling focused solely on the notice's validity, not the legality of the rent increase itself. She found no evidence that the amount stated on the notice was accurate, thereby rendering the eviction invalid while leaving the question of the rent hike unresolved.
HousingFirst, which manages more than 2,000 properties across Melbourne, has said it will seek a repayment arrangement if the increase is deemed lawful. The tribunal has not yet ruled on that issue, and a further hearing is expected in the coming weeks.
For the tenant, the decision means she can stay in her home for now, but the looming question of whether she will have to pay the higher rent remains a weight on her daily life. Her family, who rely on that stability, are cautiously optimistic as the case moves forward.