Rent Bidding Is Banned Almost Everywhere in Australia — So Why Does It Still Keep Happening? (2026)

Rent bidding is the practice of a landlord or agent inviting, soliciting, or accepting offers above the advertised rent. It includes advertising a property with a rent range ("from $600 per week" or "$600–$650"), running an informal "rent auction", or telling an applicant their offer will be more competitive if they bid higher.

What it does not include, in most states, is a renter voluntarily offering more. Almost every Australian jurisdiction allows a tenant to offer above the listed price on their own initiative. The laws target what landlords and agents can do, not what renters do ^[1][2].

This distinction — between solicited and voluntary bidding — is the single biggest reason the practice persists even in states with the strongest bans.

Victoria banned rent bidding as part of its rental reform package, with the ban taking effect in the 2025 round of reforms ^[3][4]. Properties must be advertised with a fixed price, and landlords and agents cannot invite or accept offers above the advertised rent. Price ranges are not permitted.

Voluntary offers from renters are also captured — Victoria goes further than some states in making the acceptance of higher offers (not just the soliciting) part of the prohibited conduct. This is stricter than New South Wales, Western Australia, Tasmania, or the ACT, where unsolicited higher offers can still be accepted.

New South Wales banned the solicitation of rent bids and requires rental properties to be advertised with a fixed rent amount ^[5]. Price ranges and phrases like "offers over" or "by negotiation" are not permitted in listings.

However, NSW law has not banned the acceptance of unsolicited offers above the advertised rent. Leo Patterson Ross, chief executive of the Tenants Union of NSW, has publicly criticised the effectiveness of the NSW ban, telling CHOICE that agents routinely work around the rules with suggestive language rather than direct solicitation ^[1]. Penalties in NSW for soliciting a bid are widely considered too low to act as a strong deterrent.

Queensland and the Northern Territory are, alongside Victoria, among the strictest Australian jurisdictions. Both have banned the offering and accepting of offers above the advertised price ^[1]. This means even a voluntary higher offer from a renter cannot lawfully be accepted.

In practice, this pushes Queensland agents to list properties at the price they actually want to achieve, rather than listing low and hoping for bids. Whether that translates into lower rents overall is a separate question — most analysis suggests it simply shifts the competition from price to application quality.

South Australia banned rent bidding from 1 September 2023 ^[7]. Under the reforms administered by Consumer and Business Services, landlords and agents must advertise at a fixed amount, cannot put properties up for rent auction, and cannot solicit offers over the advertised price. Where a third‑party rental app is used, the law also prevents the platform from rating or ranking applicants on the basis of a higher rent offer.

Penalties are significant. A landlord or agent who solicits a higher rent offer faces a fine of up to $20,000 ^[7]. That is among the highest headline penalties in the country — though enforcement rates, like in every state, have been a separate concern.

Western Australia's Residential Tenancies Amendment Act 2024, passed by the WA Parliament on 16 April 2024, introduced the rent bidding ban alongside a package of reforms including limits on rent increase frequency ^[8]. Under the rules, landlords cannot encourage or pressure a tenant to offer more than the advertised amount. A tenant can still voluntarily offer more ^[9].

Consumer Protection WA has published guidance that specifically flags coded phrases agents use to work around the rules — suggesting, for example, that "strengthening" an application with a higher offer would cross the line ^[9]. Stage Two of the WA reforms is still in development, so the regime may tighten further in future. Western Australia remains the state where RenterSay's editorial team urges the greatest caution, because the jurisdiction has historically offered weaker statutory protections than Victoria, Queensland, or South Australia.

Tasmania and the Australian Capital Territory have both banned the solicitation of higher rent offers but, like NSW, stop short of banning the acceptance of unsolicited bids. The Northern Territory is grouped with Queensland as having prohibited both the offering and accepting of higher offers ^[1].

In the ACT specifically, recent changes to the Residential Tenancies Act 1997 prevent landlords and agents from asking prospective tenants to offer more than advertised and require properties to be advertised with a fixed rental price ^[2]. As with NSW, tenants can still voluntarily offer above the advertised rent.

The pattern across the country is clear. In states that only ban solicitation (NSW, WA, TAS, ACT), agents report a hard‑to‑police grey area: anything that implies a higher offer would help, without explicitly asking for one, can sit on the edge of the law. Phrases like "there's a lot of interest in this property" or "your application would need to stand out" do not, on their own, amount to solicitation.

The Tenants Union of NSW has publicly described this dynamic as rent bidding by another name ^[1]. In states that also ban acceptance (VIC, QLD, NT), the pressure is reduced — but not eliminated, because enforcement still depends on renters reporting the behaviour.

Three practical reasons keep rent bidding alive even where it is illegal on both sides:

If a landlord or agent directly suggests you offer above the advertised price — whether verbally, in writing, or through hints like "you'll need to strengthen your application":

You do not have to wait until you miss out on the property. Rent bidding is prohibited conduct in every Australian jurisdiction in some form, and every state has a formal complaint process. The record of complaints is what eventually drives enforcement and tougher penalties.