Hi 2.5 mths into the lease 1 of the tenants advises they are having to move back to NZ but they have a new tenant to take their place. So I advise about the requirement to do a new property condition report and we agree, in writing, this cost will be borne by them. All organised, paid for and go to finalise the second lease with the 1 tenant who remained & the new one. Had an issue with the lawn and couldn't transfer the bond, relationship breaks down and tenants wants to break the lease again but in 1 mth. So I cannot use the property condition report and it has to be done again when they exit. Cost of $350 x 2. This is a financial loss I have had to occur due to their decision to break it twice. Tenant disagrees. We end up at the magistrates court, magistrate rules in tenants favour for both property condition reports based on this being a cost which has been brought forward and I would have to pay for it anyway. But rules in my favour for the advertising costs. So why is the property condition report a cost brought forward but the advertising for new tenants is not and is borne by the tenant? As property condition reports are mandatory now in WA I have no choice. The other issue I experienced was one of the tenants was not present. Had signed the legal representation over to the other tenant but not used the correct form and not complied with section 22 (ie other tenant was not an agent nor a legal representative). I also claimed for loss of rent but gave the new tenants keys day 2 after break lease but agreed they didn't take up residency until 4 days after the end of the break lease due to cleaning (which is the date that is on their lease) although I agreed they could store some items there. Magistrate gets the dates wrong (from end of one lease to another) and stated as they had taken possession of the property I am not awarded any loss of rent. I feel like appealing based on section 22 and also feel there needs to be a good case history set for the issue which is a real concern around the property condition report costs. Especially with it becoming more common in WA. It has just happened again to me with my new tenants and within 6 months of a 12 month lease. I do not see the logic on how in 1 year three property condition reports are seen as simply costs brought forward but advertising costs are borne by the tenant in a break lease.