In a decision that will resonate with renters across New South Wales, a Sydney tenant has successfully challenged a landlord's attempt to illegally withhold their entire rental bond following a controversial 'no grounds' eviction.
The case, heard by the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT), centred on a $2,600 bond that the landlord refused to return after the tenant was forced to vacate the property under section 85 of the state's rental laws, which allows for termination without a specified reason.
The landlord's failed argument
The property owner attempted to justify withholding the bond by presenting a lengthy list of alleged cleaning and maintenance issues. These included claims that the oven required professional cleaning, the walls needed washing, and the property suffered from general wear and tear.
However, the tribunal saw through these assertions. The member presiding over the case noted that many of the claimed issues were either exaggerated or constituted normal wear and tear – a cost that rightly falls to the landlord, not the tenant.
A precedent-setting outcome
In a decisive ruling, the tribunal member ordered the immediate return of the full bond amount to the tenant. The judgment made a particular point about the landlord's conduct, suggesting the bond claim was an improper attempt to offset financial losses incurred during the vacancy period between tenants.
This case highlights a growing tension in Australia's rental market, where 'no grounds' evictions remain legal in most states despite increasing calls for reform from tenant advocacy groups.
Broader implications for renters
Tenant advocacy organisations have seized on this case as evidence of a systemic issue. 'We regularly see retaliatory bond claims after tenants exercise their rights or face no-grounds evictions,' explained a spokesperson from the Tenants' Union of NSW.
The practice of withholding bonds has become particularly prevalent as rental vacancies tighten and property owners seek to maximise returns. This case establishes that tribunals will scrutinise such claims carefully and won't hesitate to rule against landlords when claims are unjustified.
For the thousands of renters who face similar battles each year, this decision offers both hope and a valuable precedent when challenging improper bond withholdings.
