WHEN ARE RENTAL PROVIDERS LEGALLY ENTITLED TO LIST PERSONAL INFORMATION OF RENTERS ON A TENANCY DATABASE?

1. The circumstances in which rental providers and database operators may list personal information of renters are set out in Part 10A of the RTA.
2. Section 439E(1) relevantly provides that rental providers and database operators must not list personal information about a person in a residential tenancy database unless that person was named as a renter in a residential rental agreement that has ended[20] and the person has breached the residential rental agreement[21] and because of the breach, either the person owes the residential rental provider an amount that is more than the bond or the Tribunal has made a possession order.[22]
3. The section also provides that rental providers and database operators must not list personal information about a person unless the personal information relates only to the breach and is accurate, complete and unambiguous.[23] To meet this criterion, the listing must at least specify the nature of the breach which has resulted in the renter owing more than the bond amount or the Tribunal making a possession order.[24]
4. The Bakshis say that their personal information was listed in contravention of section 439E because it was not unambiguous.
5. On 24 June 2025 another worker at the rental provider's real estate agency sent each of the Bakshis a notice stating that their details would be listed with TICA if they did not remedy a current breach of their rental agreement within fourteen days. The proposed listing notices state what personal information of the renters will be included in the register and state that 'Your reason for listing will be for not paying the rent.'
6. The documents filed by Ms Chen on 3 November 2025 demonstrate that the personal information of the renters was provided to TICA on 24 July 2025 by another worker at the real estate agency.
7. After some back and forth between TICA and the real estate agency, TICA sent an email to the agency stating 'I have created 14 Day-warning letter...please see the attached notification letter for you to send to the tenants...after 14-days I will proceed to list this tenant onto TICA'.
8. Another worker at the real estate agency sent the Bakshis a further notice each, presumably the one drafted by TICA, on 31 July 2025. The notices state what personal information of the renters will be included in the register and state 'Reason(s) for proposed lodgement:
   • Rent arrears.'
9. On 14 August 2025 TICA advised the rental agency that the Bakshis had been listed as defaulted tenants. Another worker at the real estate agency sent the Bakshis notices advising them of the details of their listing. Those notices state what personal information of the renters will be included in the register and state 'Reason(s) for proposed lodgement:
   • Rent arrears.'
10. Having regard to the documentation she produced, it is unclear how Ms Chen could have formed the view that the listings were as she put it 'suspended'.
11. Section 439A provides that the word 'list' for the purposes of Part 10A means either to enter personal information into the database or to give personal information to a database operator or someone else for entry into the database, including by way of amending information in the database.
12. Accordingly, the information given by the real estate agency on behalf of Ms Xie on and after 24 June 2025 is a listing ('Proposed Listing'), and the actual listing by TICA on 14 August 2025 is another listing ('Actual Listing').
13. This is not a claim against TICA Data Solutions Pty Ltd and so I will focus on the Proposed Listing and potential breaches by Ms Xie, through the conduct of her agents. It would be contrary to the principles of procedural fairness to make findings about the conduct of an entity who is not a party to the proceedings.

IS MS XIE LEGALLY ENTITLED TO LIST THE BAKSHIS' PERSONAL INFORMATION ON A TENANCY DATABASE?

1. It is clear that the Bakshis are renters named in a residential rental agreement which has ended, and that they have breached the terms of the residential rental agreement.
2. The Tribunal must determine whether the Bakshis owed an amount greater than the bond at the time that the listing was made, and whether the personal information provided to TICA relates only to the breach and is accurate, complete and unambiguous.
3. Section 439A states that personal information means information (including an individual's name) or an opinion, whether true or not, about an individual whose identity is apparent, or can reasonably be ascertained, from the information or opinion.
4. The renters say that the information given in the Proposed Listing is inaccurate because the physical address listed for them is the rented premises. Ms Chen did not dispute this at the hearing and I accept that the residential address is personal information and was inaccurate.
5. The Proposed Listing and the Actual Listing both state that the Bakshis owe rent arrears. There is no mention of any amount owing for loss of rent, damages, cleaning or other costs that make up the claim at the Tribunal against the Bakshis.
6. At no point in time since the rental agreement came to an end has there been an allegation that the Bakshis owe more than the bond amount in rental arrears, even taking into account Ms Chen's apparent confusion about the delineation between rental arrears and loss of rent. As late as 2 August 2025, Ms Chen sent an email to the Bakshis stating that unpaid rent from 15 July 2025 to 14 August 2025 is $4,128.00.
7. Ms Chen stated at the hearing that she did not need to tell TICA about the Bakshis' payment of $870.00 toward rental arrears on 7 August 2025 because she provided the information to TICA in June, which is not correct.[25]
8. The Proposed Listing and the Actual Listing are not accurate, complete, and unambiguous because they do not refer to the Bakshis being in breach of the terms of the rental agreement in respect to anything other than rent arrears, and incorrectly lead the reader to infer that the Bakshis owe more than the bond amount in rental arrears. This has never been accurate.
9. On 26 July 2025, a worker at the real estate agency advised TICA that 'the bond is currently still with RTBA as we are still waiting for the hearing to commence'. This is untrue, and is misleading to TICA. At that time the matter was part heard and Ms Chen was on notice that I was not in agreement with the position she put forward at the first hearing in respect to loss of rent and the construction of section 91ZB.
10. In these circumstances, the personal information provided on behalf of Ms Xie about the Bakshis to TICA cannot be said to be accurate, complete and unambiguous. The criteria at sections 439E(1)(c)(i) 439E(1)(d)(ii) are not met and as a result Ms Xie had no legal entitlement to list the personal information with TICA. Ms Xie has acted in contravention of section 439E.

WHAT ORDERS SHOULD VCAT MAKE AS A RESULT OF ITS FINDING THAT MS XIE HAS ACTED IN CONTRAVENTION OF SECTIONS 439E?

1. I conclude that the appropriate order is to remove the listing of the Bakshis' personal information from the residential tenancy database under section 439M(1)(c).
2. If an application is made under section 439L, the Tribunal may make an order under section 439M(1)(c) requiring a residential rental provider, that person's agent or database operator to remove personal information about the applicant that is listed in a residential tenancy database.
3. It is a precondition to the making of such an order that the Tribunal must be satisfied that the residential rental provider or database operator has contravened section 439E[26] and the Tribunal is satisfied that this section has been contravened.
4. The renters did not make their application under section 439L, but taking into account the Tribunal's obligation to assist self represented litigants, I shall take their application as being in part under section 439L and in part under sections 452 and 472(1)(f) of the RTA.
5. As the information is in the possession and control of the database operator TICA Data Solutions Pty Ltd, I will make orders under section 439M of the RTA against both the rental provider and the database operator to ensure that the personal information of the Bakshis is removed.
6. Section 439J provides that if, under section 439M, the Tribunal makes an order for amendment or removal of personal information from a database and the person against whom the order is made is not a party to the proceedings, the Tribunal must ensure a copy of the order is given to the relevant person. Accordingly, I direct the principal registrar to send a copy of this order to the database operator, TICA Data Solutions Pty Ltd by email to 'membership@tica.com.au'.
7. I now turn to the Bakshis' claim for compensation. The Bakshis have not quantified their alleged loss and say they leave it to the Tribunal's discretion.
8. The Bakshis say that the loss they have suffered is stress. No repercussions in the form of being unable to secure another rental property are alleged. The Bakshis consider their listing with TICA to be the zenith of a broader pattern of harassment and threatening conduct by Ms Xie's agents, principally Ms Chen. The Bakshis say that Ms Chen has acted unethically in providing their information to TICA and has used a tone in email correspondence that is unprofessional.
9. The Bakshis say that this conduct has caused 'severe stress and anxiety to the entire family including our young kids' and referred at hearing to Mrs Bakshi being so stressed as a result of the conduct that she was forced to resign from her job.
10. It is apparent that the acrimony between the Bakshis and Ms Chen is heightened. Ms Chen also says that the Bakshis have engaged in threatening and harassing behaviour by posting negative reviews on social media about the real estate agency. Ms Chen vehemently denies doing anything other than her job in compliance with the RTA and protecting the interests of the rental provider.
11. Ms Chen stated at the hearing on 29 October 2025 that she decided that the Bakshis must be listed on the TICA database because they are in her view high earners and she 'cannot accept' their decision to refuse to pay the amount she thinks they owe when the rental provider is elderly and relies on rental income as her source of income. Ms Chen further stated that she had to make the listing due to the delay in the Tribunal listing the matter for a second hearing.
12. To say the least, that Ms Chen feels that she cannot accept the Bakshis being in a small amount of rental arrears is not a lawful reason to have provided the renters' information to TICA. Further, the delay in listing the claims for bond for further hearing was undoubtedly frustrating to all parties, but not in any way the fault of the Bakshis.
13. I award no compensation to the Bakshis in proceeding R2025/19477 for three reasons. First, there is a note at the bottom of section 439L which bars the Tribunal from awarding compensation for a breach of section 439E by stating as follows:

This section does not provide for claims for compensation. If a court finds a person guilty of an offence or convicts a person of an offence under this Part, a person who has suffered injury as a direct result of the offence may apply to the court for compensation under Division 2 of Part 4 of the Sentencing Act 1991.

1. Second, because the Tribunal awards compensation for breaches of the RTA or the residential rental agreement and there is no other breach arising from the conduct complained of. There is nothing in the RTA which requires parties to be nice to one another, or which requires agents to act professionally or ethically.
2. Third, even if there had been a breach of the RTA which may give rise to compensation, the loss alleged to be suffered is not of a type for which the Tribunal can award compensation. Section 447(2) of the RTA states that the Tribunal must not make a compensation or compliance order requiring the payment of money as a consequence of death, physical injury or pain and suffering. I consider that the claim of severe stress falls within the category of pain and suffering.
3. The claim for compensation in matter R2025/19477 is dismissed.

[1] While sections 211 and 211A of the RTA does not refer expressly to being applicable to a hearing under section 419A, it is accepted that those consideration are applicable when determining a claim for compensation. See for example, Wenger v Suwignjo (Residential Tenancies) [2024] VCAT 996.

[2] With the exception of $44.21 for basement electricity costs, which the Bakshis agree to pay.

1. [3] Section 211A(3) of the RTA directs the Tribunal as to relevant considerations and calculations for the purposes of determining compensation payable in the form of break lease fees and loss of rent.

[4] Section 91Z of the RTA states that renters may give a residential rental provider a notice of intention to vacate the rented premises and such notice must specify a termination date that is not less than 28 days after the date on which the notice is given.

1. [5] Section 91ZA(1)(b) of the RTA states that a notice of intention to vacate given under s91Z is of no effect if it specifies a termination date that is earlier than the end of the term of the residential rental agreement.

[6] Section 91ZB(1)(a) of the RTA states that the section applies if the renter has been given a notice to vacate under sections 91ZX, 91ZY, 91ZZ, 91ZZA, 91ZZB, 91ZZC, 91ZZD, 91ZZDA, 91ZZE, 91ZZEA or 91ZZEB.

[7] Section 91ZB(5) states that A renter who terminates a residential rental agreement under this section by notice of intention to vacate other than on receipt of a notice to vacate referred to in subsection (1)(a), is not liable to pay to the residential rental provider in relation to that termination any form of lease break fee (however described).

[8] [1998] HCA 28; (1998) 194 CLR 355, 381 [69].

[9] Under section 211A(3)(b) of the RTA.

[10] Section 63(2) of the RTA requires renters to leave the premises reasonably clean at the end of the rental agreement and in the same condition as when the renter entered into possession, taking into account fair wear and tear to the premises.

[12] This is a relevant consideration for the purposes of section 211A(1)(a) of the RTA.

[13] Because it is a term that requires all or part of the rented premises to be professionally cleaned at the end of the tenancy, unless that term is contained in the standard form.

[14] Because it requires the renter to pay the cost of having all or part of the rented premises professionally cleaned at the end of the tenancy, unless that term is contained in the standard form.

[15] Ms Chen refers to one of these items as being for removal of rubbish, but that description is inaccurate.

[16] These items are: Four nail holes in the restaurant wall ($160.00); Four nail holes in the master bedroom wall ($160.00); Four nail holes in the second-floor living room wall ($160.00); Damaged to the wall near the light switch in the second-floor bedroom ($160.00); and Removal of leftover stickers on the bedroom door ($20.00).

1. [18] In the application filed on 4 August 2025 the Bakshis say the desired outcome is that VCAT 'Instruct Rental Provider to not to lodge the tenants under Tenancy Blacklist database till the Time VCAT decision is made under the ongoing hearing for case R202425069/01 (Where next hearing is still to be scheduled)'. Later, in the accompanying document titled 'Request Summary' the Bakshis state that they want VCAT to make orders to:
   1. Restrain rental provider and real estate agency to have any type of communication with us outside the court (Electronic, over the call or in person)
   2. Not to threaten us, As this is causing some severe stress and anxiety to the entire family including our young kids
   3. Not to blacklist us as this will cause serious implications on our reputation
   4. Compensate us for the harassment that is being caused.

[19] The email concludes 'In light of the above, I respectfully request that VCAT:

1. We seek compensation of AUD 10,00 per family member whose documents/details are shared

2. Seek written apology from rental provider addressed to Kids.

3. Remove or redact all irrelevant and sensitive personal information from the case file and record.

4. Direct the other party to refrain from including or referring to personal material not relevant to the dispute.

5. Confirm in writing how this information will be handled, stored, or removed to prevent further misuse or public disclosure.

6. Optionally, refer the conduct to an appropriate authority if considered a breach of privacy obligations.'

[25] Section 439G requires rental providers who list personal information in a residential tenancy database to give written notice to the database operator if the information is inaccurate, incomplete, ambiguous or out of date, within 7 days of becoming aware of this.