WAGGA renters are familiar with bonds specifically for pet-related damages after the idea was floated by the state's peak real estate body this year.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Although the concept has been knocked back in NSW, the Northern Territory is among the next to propose the idea along with a child bond "given the propensity for children to cause damage".
It is a suggestion, which Fitzpatrick's Real Estate director Lyn Kimball said is a huge exaggeration, believing the damage caused by a pet and child is incomparable.
With more than three decades of experience, Ms Kimball recalled the chewed architraves and bricks, scratched flooring and urination on carpets that pet owners have left behind.
The mother of four said the worst damage a child could cause to a property was Texas on floorboards or drawings on walls.
"One causes thousands of dollars of damage that a current bond does not cover, the other does not have a huge financial impact," said the REINSW property management chapter committee member.
Ms Kimball said the proposed child bond could be reflective of the Northern Territory's demographic where the level of disrespect towards properties could be greater.
However, she said parents are able to discipline a child more effectively than a misbehaving animal.
"If children damaged property they are met with discipline, but parents should be looking after their children so they aren't creating that damage," she said.
In other news:
"Pets are much harder to discipline and children are not left at home to their own devices like pets.
"Plus, an adult can damage a property to the same severity as a child."
Ms Kimball said it was high unlikely for a child bond to gain traction in NSW, given the lack of success of enforcing a pet bond.
"Landlords cannot discriminate against a tenant because they are a family. That idea will never float here, especially if we can't get a pet bond through," she said.