At what point would you replace tenants that cause excessive damage? I'm currently renovating one of my properties and noticed that the people across the road were moving out. The owner of the property popped over to say G'day, and I ended up with a days work. Turns out that he'd kicked the tenants out for causing too much damage, they were still paying the rent on time. The place was newly renovated when they moved in a few years ago. It made me wonder, would you keep a tenant in if the rent is still being paid but they are a little destructive? If you decide to replace the tenants you have to repair all of the damage, have the property vacant for a while and run the risk of it all happening again. In this case all the venetian blinds and carpet needed replacing, cupboard doors fixed, rear door was forced and jamb broken, ceiling fan blades bent, smashed window, smashed oven door & front, broken letterbox, truck load of rubbish left, big clean up plus other various maintenance to get back up to scratch. Now obviously the bond and insurance would cover some things but not all. Would you consider the financial benefit of keeping the tenants in? If they're there for another 5 years paying rent, you're getting more life out of your already damaged items right? At what point would you make the decision to replace tenants like this?