In Australia’s competitive rental market—where more than 2.2 million households rent (ABS 2024)—property managers play a vital role in ensuring seamless tenant transitions. Under tenancy laws such as Queensland’s Residential Tenancies and Rooming Accommodation Act 2008, bond cleaning is meant to return a property to a “reasonably clean” condition for a full bond refund (typically $1,400–$2,800, RTA QLD 2025).

Yet, disputes over cleaning remain one of the biggest pain points in property management. In fact, 56% of all bond claims nationwide involve cleaning disputes (NSW Fair Trading 2025). Drawing insights from state tribunals like VCAT and SACAT, here are eight of the most common frustrations property managers experience with bond cleaning agencies across Australia.

1. Substandard Cleaning Quality

Superficial cleans that miss grease, grime, or mould remain a constant frustration. A 2025 Majestic Vacate Cleaning Perth report found cleaning is among the top causes of bond disputes in WA. Property managers often face re-cleaning costs when tenants overlook ovens, windows, or carpets—issues that should’ve been handled by professional agencies in the first place.

2. Unreliable Scheduling and Attendance

Late arrivals and no-shows can derail final inspections and cause costly delays. Bond Cleaning in Melbourne (2024) noted that many VCAT bond disputes stem from agencies that “disappear” post-booking—forcing property managers to scramble for replacements in an already tight rental market.

3. Hidden Fees and Unclear Quotes

What starts as a $250–$600 job for a standard 3-bedroom home (Hipages 2025) can balloon once “extras” like carpet steam cleaning or blind washing are added. Some agents report quotes doubling mid-job, leading to budget disputes and lost confidence in service providers.

4. Non-Compliance with State Regulations

Failing to follow tenancy requirements—like using the correct RTA Form 14a in Queensland—can invalidate cleaning claims. According to SACAT (2025), cleaning and rubbish disputes are now the most common tenancy issue in South Australia. Agencies that ignore compliance not only risk tribunal losses but also expose managers to unnecessary legal complications.

5. Poor Documentation and Communication

Missing before-and-after photos or inspection reports can turn a simple refund into a lengthy dispute. NSW Fair Trading (2025) reports that 85% of undisputed bonds are refunded within two weeks—but inadequate documentation contributes heavily to the 56% of delayed or contested claims.

6. Inconsistent Cleaning Standards

For agencies handling multiple properties, inconsistency is a recurring problem. A 2025 Airtasker survey showed that while 70% of tenants hire professionals to save time, property managers often still fail inspections due to variable cleaning quality—even when using “recommended” cleaners.

7. Ignoring Pest or Special Treatments

Pet-friendly rentals commonly require flea treatments or mould removal, yet many agencies skip these steps. Majestic Vacate Cleaning (2025) found that unaddressed pet hair and odours are among the top causes of bond withholding, with REIA reporting a 15% rise in disputes related to untreated issues across major cities.

8. No Reclean or Guarantee Policies

When agencies refuse to return for touch-ups without extra charges, managers are left in a difficult position. According to Tenants Victoria (2025), landlords must account for “reasonable wear and tear,” yet many disputes stem from agencies unwilling to guarantee their work. This can double cleaning costs and delay re-letting.

The Bigger Picture

These recurring problems contribute to an estimated $500 million in withheld bonds each year (Fair Trading aggregate, 2025). For property managers, prevention begins with choosing agencies that value compliance, transparency, reliability, and documented guarantees.

As one legal expert from JustAnswer advises:

“Document the property’s condition thoroughly—it’s your strongest defence in any unjust claim.”