Fair Wear and Tear vs Damage: An Australian Property Manager's Guide

Every exit inspection comes down to the same fundamental question: is this fair wear and tear, or is this damage that the tenant should pay for?

Get it right, and you protect the landlord's investment while treating the tenant fairly. Get it wrong in one direction, and the landlord loses money they were entitled to claim. Get it wrong in the other direction, and you make a bond claim that gets rejected at tribunal, wasting everyone's time and damaging your professional reputation.

The distinction between fair wear and tear and damage is the single most contested issue in Australian bond disputes. It is also one of the least clearly defined areas of tenancy law. Every state's legislation uses the concept, but none of them provide an exhaustive definition with clear boundaries. Instead, tribunals assess each case on its merits, considering the nature of the deterioration, the length of the tenancy, the age of the item, and whether the tenant took reasonable care of the property.

This guide provides the practical framework that experienced property managers use to make this judgment call consistently. It covers the legal definitions, specific examples with clear categorisations, the grey areas where reasonable people disagree, and how to document the distinction in your condition reports.

Fair wear and tear is the normal deterioration that occurs through the ordinary, reasonable use of a property over time, even when the tenant has taken proper care of the premises. It is the gradual degradation that happens simply because someone lives in the property.

This concept exists in the tenancy legislation of every Australian state and territory. The tenant is not responsible for fair wear and tear, and the landlord cannot claim against the bond for deterioration that falls into this category. The rationale is straightforward: a property that is lived in will show signs of habitation, and the rent the tenant pays already accounts for this normal use.

The important phrase is "reasonable use." Fair wear and tear assumes the tenant has used the property in a normal, reasonable manner and has taken reasonable care. If a tenant leaves windows open during rainstorms and the windowsills develop water damage, that is not fair wear and tear despite being a gradual deterioration — it results from the tenant's failure to take reasonable care.

Similarly, fair wear and tear accounts for the passage of time but scales with the length of the tenancy. A property tenanted for six months should show minimal signs of wear. A property tenanted for five years will show significantly more. What constitutes fair wear and tear in a five-year tenancy would not necessarily be fair wear and tear in a six-month tenancy.

Damage, by contrast, is deterioration that goes beyond what would be expected from normal, reasonable use. It includes deliberate damage, accidental damage, and damage caused by negligence or failure to maintain the property in a reasonable condition. Damage is claimable against the bond.

Each state and territory references fair wear and tear in its tenancy legislation, though the exact wording varies.

Queensland: The Residential Tenancies and Rooming Accommodation Act 2008 defines fair wear and tear as "reasonable use deterioration." The tenant is not liable for fair wear and tear, and QCAT assesses each case based on the specific circumstances.

New South Wales: The Residential Tenancies Act 2010 uses the term "fair wear and tear" and provides that the tenant is not responsible for reasonable wear resulting from the ordinary use of the premises. NCAT applies this on a case-by-case basis.

Victoria: The Residential Tenancies Act 1997 states that the tenant must not intentionally or negligently cause damage, but is not responsible for fair wear and tear. VCAT has developed a substantial body of case guidance on the distinction.

Western Australia: The Residential Tenancies Act 1987 provides that the tenant must keep the premises in a reasonable state of cleanliness and not intentionally or negligently damage the premises. Fair wear and tear is excluded from the tenant's obligations. The Magistrates Court assesses disputed claims.

South Australia: The Residential Tenancies Act 1995 requires tenants to keep the premises clean and not damage them, with fair wear and tear excluded. SACAT considers the length of the tenancy and the age of items when assessing claims.

Tasmania: The Residential Tenancy Act 1997 excludes fair wear and tear from the tenant's obligations. The Residential Tenancy Commissioner and the Magistrates Court handle disputes.

ACT: The Residential Tenancies Act 1997 uses the concept of "fair wear and tear" and the ACAT tribunal applies it in bond disputes.

Northern Territory: The Residential Tenancies Act 1999 excludes fair wear and tear from tenant liability. The Northern Territory Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NTCAT) handles disputes.

Across all jurisdictions, the principle is the same: tenants are not liable for deterioration that results from normal, reasonable use. The specific application depends on the facts of each case.

The following examples illustrate the distinction between fair wear and tear and damage. These reflect the general approach taken by tribunals across Australia, though individual cases may be assessed differently based on their specific circumstances.

Walls: Fair wear and tear: Small scuffs and marks in hallways and high-traffic areas. Faded paint from sun exposure. Minor cracks from building settlement. Small nail holes from hanging pictures (up to a reasonable number). Damage: Large holes from door handles or impacts. Extensive scuffs from furniture repeatedly hitting walls. Drawn-on or written-on walls. Paint peeling from excessive moisture in non-bathroom areas. Numerous or large-diameter fixings beyond normal picture hanging.

Carpet: Fair wear and tear: Gradual flattening in high-traffic areas like hallways and doorways. Slight colour fading from sun exposure. Indentations from furniture legs. Damage: Burns (cigarette or iron). Permanent stains from spills not cleaned promptly (red wine, paint, dye). Tears or cuts. Pet damage (scratching, urine stains, odour). Fraying beyond normal wear. Bleach marks.

Paint: Fair wear and tear: Gradual fading from sunlight. Minor scuffs in high-traffic areas. Slight yellowing of white paint over time. Damage: Large scrapes exposing plaster. Paint stripped by adhesive (hooks, tape, decals). Unapproved colour changes. Smoke damage or nicotine staining. Mould caused by tenant's failure to ventilate.

Kitchen: Fair wear and tear: Light scratches on benchtops from normal kitchen use. Worn finish on tap handles. Minor discolouration of grout from regular cleaning products. Damage: Burns on benchtops. Chipped tiles from dropped objects. Broken cupboard hinges from excessive force. Heavy grease buildup from lack of cleaning. Broken or cracked sink.

Bathroom: Fair wear and tear: Light limescale on taps and showerheads. Minor grout discolouration. Gradual wear on the enamel surface of an old bath. Damage: Mould growth from failure to ventilate or clean. Cracked tiles from impact. Broken towel rails pulled from walls. Blocked drains from accumulated hair or foreign objects. Damaged shower screens.

Floors (hard): Fair wear and tear: Light scratches on timber floors in traffic areas. Slight fading. Normal settling of floorboards. Damage: Deep gouges or scratches from dragged furniture. Water damage from spills left unattended. Pet scratches. Broken or cracked tiles from impact. Vinyl tears.

Windows and doors: Fair wear and tear: Stiff hinges or handles from age. Minor weathering of external door surfaces. Faded or yellowed fly screen mesh. Damage: Cracked or broken glass. Torn fly screens. Broken locks from forced entry or misuse. Holes or dents in doors. Damaged blinds from yanking or children.

Outdoor: Fair wear and tear: Grass wear in high-use areas (near clothesline, paths). Weathering of timber fences. Faded paint on exterior surfaces. Damage: Dead lawn from neglect or lack of watering. Broken fence palings from impact. Oil stains on driveway. Overgrown garden (tenant failed to maintain). Damaged gates or hinges.

The length of the tenancy is one of the most important factors in determining whether deterioration is fair wear and tear or damage. Tribunals consistently take tenancy duration into account when assessing bond claims.

The basic principle is proportional expectation. A six-month tenancy should result in very little visible wear. A two-year tenancy will show moderate signs of use. A five-year or longer tenancy will show significant wear, particularly on items with limited lifespans like carpet, paint, and appliances.

Carpet is the most common example. A new carpet in a property tenanted for one year should still be in very good condition. Light traffic wear in doorways is expected, but stains and excessive wear are not. The same carpet after a five-year tenancy will show noticeable flattening in hallways, some colour change, and general signs of age. This is fair wear and tear for a five-year occupation.

Paint follows a similar pattern. Interior paint in a property tenanted for one year should look close to new. After three to five years, expect some fading, minor scuffs, and the general dulling that comes from years of cleaning and habitation. After seven or more years, the paint may need refreshing regardless of how carefully the tenant used the property.

Appliances and fixtures have expected lifespans that tribunals reference when assessing claims. A new oven has an expected lifespan of 10 to 15 years. If a five-year-old oven needs repair, the tribunal will consider whether the issue results from normal use (fair wear and tear) or misuse (damage). A scratched oven door on a 12-year-old oven is almost certainly fair wear and tear.

This is why your entry condition report should record the apparent age and condition of major items. Noting "carpet — approximately 3 years old, good condition" at entry gives you context for assessing fair wear and tear at exit. Without this information, the tribunal makes assumptions, and those assumptions may not favour your position.

Depreciation also applies to damage claims. If a tenant damages a five-year-old carpet that had an expected lifespan of ten years, you can only claim for the remaining useful life, not the full replacement cost. Claiming the full cost of new carpet to replace a five-year-old carpet is unreasonable and demonstrates a lack of understanding of fair wear and tear principles. Tribunals will reduce the claim accordingly, and overclaiming damages your credibility for all of your claims.

While the examples above are relatively clear-cut, there are numerous grey areas where the distinction between fair wear and tear and damage is genuinely ambiguous. These are the items that generate the most disputes and where tribunal outcomes can vary.

Picture hooks and wall fixings: Most tribunals accept a reasonable number of small nail holes as fair wear and tear, reflecting the normal use of hanging pictures. But what is "reasonable"? Two hooks per room? Ten? What about larger fixings like wall plugs for shelving? There is no universal answer. Tribunals generally look at the number, size, and type of fixings and assess whether they represent normal use for the tenancy length.

Carpet stains in kitchen or dining areas: A small food stain on carpet near the dining table might be considered fair wear and tear (people eat, and occasional spills are normal) or damage (the tenant should have cleaned it promptly). The size, nature, and permanence of the stain, and whether the tenant attempted to clean it, all factor into the assessment.

Mould: Mould is one of the most contested items in bond disputes. Mould can result from structural issues (the landlord's responsibility), inadequate ventilation (potentially the landlord's responsibility if ventilation infrastructure is insufficient), or the tenant's failure to ventilate and clean (the tenant's responsibility). Determining which cause applies requires careful assessment of the property's ventilation, the tenant's behaviour, and the location and extent of the mould.

Garden maintenance: Tenants are generally required to maintain the garden to a reasonable standard, but what constitutes "reasonable" varies significantly. A perfectly manicured garden at entry does not mean the tenant must maintain it to the same standard. However, a dead lawn or completely overgrown garden is generally considered beyond fair wear and tear.

Marks behind doors: When a door is opened fully, the handle contacts the wall behind it. Over time, this creates a mark or indentation. Some tribunals view this as fair wear and tear (the door was designed to open, and the mark is from normal use). Others consider it damage if a door stop was provided and the tenant failed to use it, or if no door stop was provided (in which case, the landlord should have installed one).

Cleaning standards: The tenant must return the property in the same standard of cleanliness as entry, accounting for fair wear and tear. But how much cleaning deterioration is "fair"? Light dust is fair wear and tear. Heavy grease in the oven may or may not be, depending on the length of the tenancy and the cleaning standard at entry. This is why specific, detailed entry reports are so important — they establish the exact standard against which the exit is measured.

Your condition reports are the primary evidence for distinguishing fair wear and tear from damage. Here is how to document the property in a way that supports this distinction.

Record the age of major items at entry. Note the apparent age of carpet, paint, appliances, and other items with limited lifespans. "Carpet — appears new" or "carpet — appears approximately 5 years old, moderate traffic wear in hallway" gives the tribunal context for assessing what constitutes fair wear and tear at exit.

Be specific about existing wear at entry. If the carpet already has traffic wear in the hallway at entry, record it. If the paint is already faded on the north-facing wall, record it. Existing wear at entry establishes that the item was not in new condition when the tenant took possession, which adjusts the baseline for what can be claimed at exit.

Photograph comprehensively at entry. Wide room shots plus close-ups of every surface, fixture, and area. Pristine entry photos paired with deteriorated exit photos tell a clear story. Without entry photos, you have no visual comparison.

Use consistent, specific descriptions at both entry and exit. If the entry report describes "walls — painted white, no marks," the exit report should describe "walls — painted white, three scuff marks on east wall behind door area, each approximately 20-30mm, light grey." The specific descriptions make the change clear.

Avoid interpretive language in the report. Do not write "damage caused by tenant." Write "hole in plasterboard, approximately 50mm diameter, located at 1200mm height on south wall, not present at entry per entry report and photos." The condition report records facts. The interpretation of whether something is fair wear and tear or damage is made separately, in the bond claim submission or at tribunal.

Record the working condition of everything at both entry and exit. An oven element that does not heat at exit is only claimable if the entry report confirms it was working at entry. Test and record every functional item at both inspections.

Note environmental factors. Sun exposure on north-facing windows, humidity in bathrooms without exhaust fans, tree roots near fences — these factors contribute to deterioration that may be fair wear and tear rather than tenant damage. Recording them at entry provides context.

Understanding how tribunal members approach fair wear and tear assessments helps you prepare stronger evidence and make better decisions about which claims to pursue.

The entry condition report: This is the starting point for every assessment. The tribunal compares the entry condition to the exit condition. Without a thorough entry report, the tribunal cannot determine what changed during the tenancy. In the absence of clear entry documentation, tribunals generally give the benefit of the doubt to the tenant.

Photographic evidence: Side-by-side photos at entry and exit are the most compelling evidence in fair wear and tear disputes. When a tribunal member can see a clean wall at entry and a damaged wall at exit, the visual evidence speaks for itself.

Tenancy length: Longer tenancies are expected to show more wear. The tribunal considers whether the observed deterioration is proportional to the time the tenant occupied the property.

Age and condition of items at entry: A new carpet that is stained after one year is treated differently from a ten-year-old carpet that shows additional wear after one year. The expected lifespan of the item is factored in.

Nature of the deterioration: Is the deterioration gradual (suggesting wear) or sudden (suggesting an event or negligence)? A gradually worn carpet path is wear. A large bleach mark is damage. A gradually building grease layer in an oven over three years is more nuanced and depends on the standard at entry.

Tenant's conduct: Did the tenant take reasonable care of the property? Evidence of regular cleaning, prompt reporting of maintenance issues, and reasonable use of the property supports a fair wear and tear argument. Evidence of neglect, unreported damage, or unreasonable use supports a damage argument.

Reasonableness of the claim: Tribunals assess whether the claimed amount is reasonable and proportionate. Over-claiming for items that are clearly fair wear and tear undermines the credibility of your entire claim. Be selective and only claim for items you are confident constitute damage beyond normal use.

The landlord's maintenance obligations: If deterioration results from the landlord's failure to maintain the property (for example, a leaking roof that damages ceilings, or insufficient ventilation that causes mould), the tenant is not responsible regardless of the damage.

The distinction between fair wear and tear and damage depends entirely on comparing the property's condition at two points in time: entry and exit. The clearer and more detailed that comparison, the easier it is to make the right judgment call and to present compelling evidence if the matter reaches tribunal.

ConditionHQ's comparison feature automatically pairs entry and exit descriptions and photographs for each room and item, presenting them side by side. Changes in condition are immediately visible: the clean oven at entry next to the greasy oven at exit, the unblemished carpet at entry next to the stained carpet at exit.

The AI-generated descriptions provide the specificity that tribunals require. Instead of comparing "good condition" at entry against "damage noted" at exit, you compare "walls painted white, semi-gloss finish, no marks or scuffs on any surface" against "walls painted white, semi-gloss finish, three scuff marks on east wall at handle height, each approximately 20-30mm, consistent with door handle contact." That level of detail makes the assessment straightforward.

For property managers, the comparison view also helps you decide which claims to pursue before submitting a bond claim. When you can see the entry and exit evidence side by side, you can assess whether the deterioration looks like fair wear and tear or damage, and how strong your evidence is for each item. This prevents overclaiming, which damages your credibility, and underclaiming, which costs the landlord money.

ConditionHQ offers a free tier with three reports per month. The Pro plan at $59 per month and Agency plan at $149 per month provide unlimited reports and the full comparison toolkit.