ACT Exit Condition Report: Complete Guide for Canberra Property Managers (2026)

The exit condition report documents the physical condition of a rental property at the end of the tenancy — once the tenant has vacated and returned all keys. In the ACT, this document is compared directly against the entry condition report to identify any changes that occurred during the tenancy, and to determine which of those changes exceed fair wear and tear and could justify a bond deduction.

The exit condition report is not a formality. It is the primary evidentiary document in any bond claim, and the quality of that document — how specific the descriptions are, how well the photographs are linked to individual items, and how clearly it shows change from the entry condition — determines whether a legitimate claim can be sustained at the ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal (ACAT).

Canberra's rental market has distinct characteristics worth noting. A significant proportion of tenancies are professional, government-linked, or fixed-term contracts tied to employment postings, which means regular and predictable end-of-tenancy cycles. The ACT also has a 14-day tenant review window for entry condition reports — the longest in Australia — which means the entry baseline, once agreed, is particularly robust. Completing a thorough exit condition report and building a comparison against that strong entry record is both a legal obligation and the most effective risk management available to a Canberra property manager.

For a full treatment of the entry condition report process — which is the document the exit report is compared against — see the ACT condition report requirements guide.

Condition reports in ACT residential tenancies are governed by the Residential Tenancies Act 1997 (ACT), as amended by subsequent legislation including the Housing and Consumer Affairs Legislation Amendment Act 2024 (A2024-29). The Act requires a condition report at both the commencement and the conclusion of every residential tenancy — the exit report is not optional in the ACT.

At entry, Section 29 places the obligation on the lessor: two signed copies of the prescribed condition report must be provided to the tenant no later than the day after the tenant takes possession of the premises. The tenant then has 14 days (two weeks) to review the report, note any disagreements, and return one signed copy.

At exit, Section 30A governs. It requires the lessor to carry out an inspection of the premises together with the tenant at the end of the tenancy, and to complete and sign a condition report based on that inspection. In other words, the ACT exit report is a joint document produced at a joint inspection — not a form the tenant fills in and posts back afterwards. A party may sign the report in the other party's absence only where that party was given a reasonable opportunity to attend the inspection.

The ACT framework treats condition reporting as a shared obligation across the tenancy lifecycle. Unlike Queensland's Residential Tenancies and Rooming Accommodation Act 2008 — which assigns exit condition report responsibilities through distinct provisions for tenant and agent separately — the ACT Act (Section 30A) makes the end-of-tenancy inspection and report an explicitly joint exercise. Both parties are required to participate in the exit reporting process.

The ACT Revenue Office (administered through Access Canberra) publishes the prescribed condition report form for residential tenancies in the territory. Unlike Queensland, which uses distinct form numbers for entry (Form 1a) and exit (Form 14a), or Victoria, which uses a single Form 4 document with clearly labelled entry and end-of-tenancy sections, the ACT does not assign a separate exit form number. The prescribed form published by Access Canberra covers both entry and exit inspections using the same room-by-room structure.

This parallel structure is both deliberate and practical. When the entry section records "kitchen floor: ceramic tiles, grout clean, no cracking — photo reference 12" and the exit section records "kitchen floor: grout stained around dishwasher area, discolouration not present at entry — photo reference 78," the before-and-after story is immediately apparent to both parties and to any ACAT member reviewing the documents.

Property managers using digital inspection platforms should confirm that their software generates exit reports equivalent in content and structure to the Access Canberra-prescribed form. A generic inspection checklist that omits required sections or does not follow the prescribed structure may carry less evidentiary weight at ACAT, whose members are familiar with the prescribed format.

When completing the exit section, apply the same level of specificity — and ideally the same language conventions — as the entry section. Parallel language across entry and exit makes item-by-item comparison clearer for any third party reviewing the documents.

Under Section 30A of the Residential Tenancies Act 1997 (ACT), the lessor must carry out the end-of-tenancy inspection together with the tenant, and complete and sign a condition report based on that inspection. The exit report is a joint document — the responsibility to organise and conduct the inspection rests with the lessor (or the managing agent), and the tenant is entitled to take part.

Because the report is signed by both parties, the ideal is a single agreed record. Where the tenant cannot or does not attend, the lessor may complete and sign the report provided the tenant was given a reasonable opportunity to attend the inspection. If a bond dispute later proceeds to ACAT and the parties' accounts differ on specific items, ACAT considers the photographic evidence alongside the written condition report.

The exit inspection must be conducted before any contractors — cleaners, painters, or tradespeople — attend the property. The exit condition report must document the property as the tenant left it, not after rectification has occurred. An oven cleaned by a contractor before the exit inspection was documented is evidence that cannot be recovered. Organise the exit inspection, complete it fully, and take photographs before any work orders are issued.

Coordinate the inspection date with the tenant. Because Section 30A makes the inspection a joint exercise, giving the tenant clear notice of the inspection time and a genuine opportunity to attend is not just good practice — it is what allows you to complete a compliant report if the tenant ultimately does not turn up. Document your notification of the inspection date and any response received, regardless of whether the tenant attends.

Two different access rules operate at the end of an ACT tenancy, and they are easy to confuse.

The first is the routine inspection notice period: under Schedule 1 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1997 (ACT), the lessor must give the tenant one week's (seven days') written notice of a general inspection. This is a comparatively generous notice period — matched only by a handful of other jurisdictions — and it applies to the periodic inspections conducted during the tenancy, not to the end-of-tenancy exit report.

The second is the 24-hour access rule in the final three weeks. In the last three weeks of the tenancy, the tenant must permit reasonable access on 24 hours' notice — but this access is specifically to allow the premises to be shown to prospective tenants (and, where the property is being sold, prospective purchasers). It is an access-for-viewings provision, not a reduced-notice mechanism for the exit inspection. Property managers sometimes assume the 24-hour rule lets them run the final condition inspection on a day's notice; it does not.

The exit condition report itself is produced under Section 30A: a joint inspection carried out by the lessor together with the tenant at the end of the tenancy. There is no prescribed statutory notice figure attached to the Section 30A final inspection — because it is a joint exercise, it is arranged cooperatively with the tenant for a mutually workable time, typically on or around the vacate date once the property is empty and the keys are returned.

For most fixed-term tenancies where the vacate date is known in advance, agree the exit-inspection time with the tenant well ahead of the end date and confirm it in writing by email or SMS — both create a timestamped record. Retain the confirmation and any acknowledgement from the tenant. If the tenant is given a reasonable opportunity to attend and does not, Section 30A still allows you to complete and sign the report — but a documented invitation is what establishes that the opportunity was genuinely offered.

Work through the property systematically, room by room, using the entry condition report as your reference. Every item documented at entry needs a corresponding notation at exit. The items most commonly raised in ACT bond disputes — and that therefore require the most specific documentation — are:

Living areas: Walls at shoulder height and around light switches, ceilings, floor coverings (stains, burns, tears, or pet damage), windows and window tracks, door condition and handles, light fittings, and any curtains, blinds, or wall-mounted inclusions.

Bedrooms: All wall surfaces, carpet or floor covering condition, built-in wardrobe interiors (shelves, hanging rails, wardrobe floor), any ceiling fan or air conditioning unit, and light fittings.

Bathrooms: Tiles and grout (mould, cracking, staining), shower screen condition and silicon seals, bath surface if present, toilet bowl and cistern interior, vanity surface, mirror, tapware, and exhaust fan.

Kitchen: Oven interior and exterior (grease, food residue, condition of racks and elements), cooktop surface and burners or elements, rangehood and filter, dishwasher interior where included, all bench surfaces, splashback, sink and tapware, and every cupboard inside and out including the underside of shelves and the base of lower cupboards.

External areas: Lawns (mowed and edged, or not), garden beds, paths and paving, fencing, carport or garage floor surface, letterbox, clothesline, and any included external items such as garden sheds or pool equipment.

For each area where exit condition differs from entry, describe the difference specifically: the room, the surface, the nature of the difference, and the approximate extent. "Bedroom 2: east wall, two nail holes of approximately 15mm diameter at picture-rail height, not recorded at entry" is a documentable claim. "Wall: some damage" is not.

The exit condition report has no standalone purpose — it is read against the entry condition report to tell a before-and-after story. The entry condition report is the baseline; the exit report is the measure of what changed.

In the ACT, the 14-day tenant review window for entry condition reports makes the entry baseline particularly settled. A tenant who has had two weeks to review the entry report and has returned it without noting any disagreements has effectively agreed to the documented entry condition. At exit, this means the comparison starts from a confirmed baseline — ACAT cannot easily relitigate what the property looked like at entry if the tenant already agreed to the entry report. Where the tenant did note specific disagreements at entry, those items are already flagged in the file, and the exit comparison must engage with them directly.

Conduct the exit comparison item by item, not room by room in aggregate. For each item where the exit condition is materially worse than the entry condition, the three questions to answer are:

First: Was the item already recorded as damaged or defective at entry? If so, a claim for that item is unlikely to succeed at ACAT.

Second: Does the deterioration exceed fair wear and tear given the length of the tenancy and the age of the item? If it falls within normal wear, the item is not claimable regardless of the visual change.

Third: Can the difference between entry and exit be demonstrated by timestamped photographs linked to specific items in both condition reports? Without photographic evidence connected to the written record, the assessment alone may not be sufficient at ACAT.

See the entry vs exit condition reports guide for a detailed treatment of how the comparison works across different item types and tenancy lengths.

Fair wear and tear is the normal deterioration of a property from ordinary use over time. It cannot be claimed against the bond, regardless of how the tenancy ends or what condition the property is returned in. The Residential Tenancies Act 1997 (ACT) does not provide an exhaustive definition, but the principle applies consistently across Australian residential tenancy law and is well understood in ACAT proceedings.

In the ACT context, where many tenancies are professional and of fixed duration, the following are generally considered fair wear and tear: minor scuff marks in high-traffic areas such as hallways and near doorways, small marks around light switches and door handles from regular use, slight carpet compression where furniture stood throughout the tenancy, and gradual fading of paintwork on sun-facing walls over a multi-year occupancy.

Damage that goes beyond fair wear and tear — and is generally claimable — includes holes in walls from improperly installed anchors or bolts, carpet stains from spills or pet accidents, burnt or torn floor coverings, broken tiles, grease buildup in an oven from inadequate cleaning during the tenancy, and mould resulting from the tenant's ventilation practices rather than from a building defect.

The length of the tenancy is relevant. ACAT considers how long the property was occupied when assessing what level of wear is reasonable. A mark on a skirting board appearing after a 12-month tenancy may be treated differently from the same mark after a four-year occupancy, where considerably more wear would be expected from normal use.

For worked examples across common rental property scenarios, including how ACAT members typically approach the fair wear and tear boundary, see the fair wear and tear vs damage guide.

Rental bonds in the ACT are held by ACT Rental Bonds, which sits within the ACT Revenue Office (Access Canberra). The maximum bond is four weeks' rent, and it must be lodged with the ACT Revenue Office within 14 days of the lessor receiving it. At the end of the tenancy, either party — lessor or tenant — can apply to ACT Rental Bonds for the bond to be released, nominating a proposed split.

If both parties agree on the split, or if no notice of dispute is lodged within two weeks of the other party being notified of the application, the bond is released in accordance with the application. If a notice of dispute is lodged within the two-week window, ACT Rental Bonds automatically refers the matter to ACAT for determination — neither party needs to file a separate tribunal application for the bond itself.

The exit condition report and its associated photographic evidence are the core materials for any condition-related bond claim. At minimum, your evidence package should include: the signed entry condition report (preferably the tenant-reviewed copy returned within the 14-day window); the exit condition report completed after the tenant vacated; timestamped photographs from both entry and exit, organised by room and linked to specific items; and paid invoices or formal written quotes for any cleaning, repair, or replacement being claimed. If claiming outstanding rent, include the rental ledger showing the balance owing.

Once the dispute is escalated to ACAT, a written claims list — specifying each deduction, the amount, and the reason — must be provided to both the tenant and ACAT at least seven calendar days before the scheduled ACAT conference. This requirement is not optional and arriving at conference without having complied with it significantly weakens your position.

For the complete ACAT dispute process step by step, see the ACAT bond dispute guide for ACT property managers.

Property managers who work across multiple Australian states need to be aware of the key differences in how the ACT approaches the exit condition report:

No numbered exit form. Unlike Queensland (Form 14a), Victoria (Form 4), or Western Australia (Property Condition Report), the ACT does not assign a distinct form number to the exit condition report. The prescribed form published by Access Canberra covers both entry and exit in parallel sections.

A mandatory joint exit inspection (Section 30A). In the ACT the exit report is legally required, and it is produced at a joint inspection carried out by the lessor together with the tenant — not filled in unilaterally by either party after the fact. This differs from Queensland, where the exit process is tenant-initiated using Form 14a, and it is a stronger requirement than states where an exit report is merely recommended. Where the tenant is given a reasonable opportunity to attend and does not, the lessor may complete and sign the report alone.

Don't confuse the 24-hour access rule with the exit inspection. In the final three weeks of the tenancy, the tenant must allow access on 24 hours' notice — but that is to show the premises to prospective tenants or purchasers, not to conduct the final condition inspection. The Section 30A exit inspection carries no prescribed statutory notice figure because it is arranged jointly with the tenant. Routine inspections during the tenancy require a full week's written notice.

2-week bond dispute window. Queensland's equivalent deadline to dispute a bond refund application is seven days after receiving a Notice of Unresolved Dispute from the RTA. In the ACT, the window is two weeks — but the consequence of missing it is the same: the bond is released in accordance with the application on file.

ACAT and the automatic referral. Unlike Queensland (where the property manager must actively apply to QCAT within seven days of a Notice of Unresolved Dispute or forfeit the bond), an ACT bond dispute lodged in time with ACT Rental Bonds is automatically referred to ACAT. The referral pathway removes the risk of a missed filing deadline at the tribunal, but the 7-day advance claims list requirement before the ACAT conference is a distinct obligation that must be met.

The exit inspection mistakes that undermine bond claims in the ACT follow a consistent pattern. Most are avoidable with the right preparation.

Inspecting before the property is fully vacated. The exit condition report must document the property after all the tenant's belongings have been removed. Inspecting while furniture or personal items remain makes it impossible to accurately assess floors, built-in storage, and wall surfaces.

Photographing after contractors have attended. The exit photographs must capture the condition the tenant left the property in. Engaging a cleaner or painter before completing and photographing the exit inspection destroys the primary evidence. Always complete the exit documentation before any works are commissioned.

Vague descriptions that do not function as evidence. "Bathroom: needs cleaning" cannot support a claim at ACAT. "Bathroom: grout between floor tiles heavily stained with mould along south wall and at shower base, not recorded at entry — photo references 41, 42" can. The specificity of each description directly determines how useful it is in a disputed claim.

Not bringing the entry report to the exit inspection. Every item in the exit inspection should be cross-referenced against the entry report in real time. Working from memory makes the comparison harder to document accurately and easier to challenge at ACAT.

Using a non-prescribed form. ACAT members are familiar with the Access Canberra-prescribed condition report format. An agency-created checklist that does not follow the prescribed structure introduces questions about whether all required items were assessed, and the document carries less evidentiary weight as a result.

Missing the seven-day claims list deadline. Once a bond dispute is referred to ACAT and a conference date is set, the property manager must give both the tenant and ACAT a detailed written claims list — specifying each deduction, the amount claimed, and the reason — at least seven calendar days before the conference. This is a legal requirement under the Act. Arriving at the conference without a compliant claims list is one of the most common reasons a legitimately supported bond claim performs poorly at ACAT.

For a broader treatment of condition report mistakes that affect bond outcomes across all Australian states, see condition report mistakes that cost you bond claims.