20/01/2026
Retirement Villages: Important Context Behind the Headlines
There’s been a lot of discussion recently about retirement villages in Australia, including concerns raised about exit fees, complex contracts, and residents feeling financially disadvantaged. These concerns should not be ignored — some people have had genuinely negative experiences, and those stories deserve to be heard.
However, it’s also important to put the issue into proper context.
Retirement villages are not traditional property investments.
They are lifestyle and housing arrangements designed to provide security, community, reduced maintenance, and age-appropriate living. This distinction is critical. Entry contributions are structured differently to reflect the ongoing services, shared facilities, and long-term operating costs that residents benefit from while living there.
Exit fees and refurbishment costs are not “hidden” — but they must be clearly understood upfront.
Deferred management fees and refurbishment provisions exist so villages can remain financially viable without charging very high weekly fees. Problems arise when residents or families do not receive proper independent legal and financial advice before signing. That is a failure of process, not proof that the entire model is exploitative.
Not all retirement villages are the same.
Fee structures, exit arrangements, refurbishment obligations, and resident protections vary widely between operators and contracts. Some villages cap exit fees, share capital gains, or significantly limit refurbishment costs. Broad statements based on a small number of extreme cases can be misleading.
Lifestyle outcomes matter too.
Many residents choose retirement villages because they feel safer, less isolated, and better supported. For thousands of Australians, the social connection, security, and peace of mind outweigh the financial trade-offs — particularly compared to the costs of maintaining a private home or paying for in-home services over time.
That said — reform and transparency are needed.
Contracts should be simpler, clearer, and easier to compare. Stronger regulation and mandatory disclosure standards would help ensure people make informed decisions. Industry accountability and consumer protection can — and should — improve.
The takeaway:
Retirement village living is not right for everyone, and it should never be entered lightly. But it is also not a scam, nor inherently “elder abuse.” It is a specialised housing model that requires:
✔ clear disclosure
✔ independent advice
✔ realistic expectations
With the right safeguards and informed decision-making, retirement villages can continue to provide a valuable housing and lifestyle option for older Australians.
Informed choice — not fear — is what protects people.
Contact us on 0420 876 911
