How we screen prospective tenants

Fair housing law does not principally punish bad intent; it punishes inconsistency. An owner who applies a slightly different standard to two applicants has a problem whether or not anything improper was in their mind, and the record of what was applied is what settles it.

So the criteria exist in writing before a listing goes live, they are disclosed to applicants, and they do not move once applications are in hand. If a standard turns out to be wrong for a property, it changes for the next vacancy, not for the current one.

A score on its own is a poor predictor. What the report actually shows — whether housing-related obligations were paid on time, whether there is a pattern or a single bad period with recovery afterwards, whether the debt load leaves room for the rent — is far more informative than the number on the front.

Medical collections in particular tell you very little about whether someone pays their rent, and treating them as though they do quietly filters out good tenants.

Most screening calls the current landlord. The current landlord may want the tenant to leave, and has an obvious incentive to say encouraging things. The prior landlord has no stake at all, which is precisely why their answer is worth more.

We call both, ask the same specific questions of each — did they pay on time, was the unit returned in reasonable condition, would you rent to them again — and note where the two accounts disagree.