Updating post from Reddit.
[deleted]
All invited to view due to meeting affordability requirements. The couple would be favourite on paper. The rest would need a home-owning guarantor as we have a policy of two referenced incomes or one and guarantor.
I would add to this that our process includes more in-depth interviewing so I would have more info to go on plus the impression of them at viewing is very important indeed.
I totally agree with you on the importance of interview; but really - you won’t let to any single person without a guarantor, regardless of income? Seems extraordinary.
Would have in the past and have (we have been doing this since 2012) but government meddling (with much more to come) and the complete collapse of any effective court system means I will always look to reduce risk. Two stable and referenced incomes are always better than one. The demand where I invest is so high I have no need to deviate from this policy that has served me so well.
Invite all to view, then can spin you any old story at this stage, and a viewing usually takes no more than 10 minutes. Make a list of all who say they like the property, take your pick from the list and proceed with referencing. If they fail referencing, go to your next choice.
Assuming they've all viewed and are interested, I'd probably look at 3 or 4 as first choices.
You've also got to consider how they present at the viewing. I tend to favour people who seem organised and business-like. Another factor is right to rent - a lot of referencing companies will do these checks too, but if you already know the applicant is a UK passport holder it's one less thing to worry about.
Making this decision based on the gender of the applicants in any way is a fairly significant breach of the 2010 Equality Act. It's the kind of thing that would be very hard to prove unless you do something like make a post on social media listing a protected characteristic along with other reasons rent/not.
Just worth a mention.
As with everyone else, on its face all would be invited for a viewing and, assuming nothing else cropped up, in principle they would all be suitable.
If we assume everything is above board in terms of guarantors & references I would provisionally say 4/3 >1 >2.
The couple would be preferable due to the 2nd income but it depends a bit on how stable the self employment income is, the older bloke I like the job security and I would think he would have enough drama in his life to want to have any at home.
The PHD student I would think would be relatively stable for the length of the PHD program and typically we've found older students treat places well, and the younger bloke is last simply because without 2 years in a job he can be fired without cause, so there is a bit of risk involved.
The student and the young bloke I would ask for a guarantor and the others I would be happy without, provided they have good references and they pass the affability test when they view the place.
Bearing in mind the PhD student will probably need specialised landlord insurance (more costly for you) as they are classed student let, they would also be more likely to move on after their PhD or they might stay put so potentially someone without a job which might leave you with having to do a section 8 eviction. I would say the rest seems decent.
None of those. The priority is to choose a tenant who has something to lose if they screw you over or stay without paying rent. That means assets. Someone who it is plausible to sue if it goes badly wrong. 100k in the bank is nice or at least 20k is a small flat in a cheap place, other property,or a guarantor - or a massive salary without hand to mouth cashflow in other words. Take a careful look at bank statements and explain what you are looking for - cashflow and assets.
They are taking control of your £xxxk asset - treat it as a bank would with a massive loan. This is 2025. Income is meaningless in someone who spends it all and has no savings/shares/property.
That sounds a bit illegal, I have never been asked something like that
Not remotely illegal to ask for full assets credentials on someone taking control of a million pound asset. If they don't want to provide it that is up to them. Most people who want to enter into a contract would if they could.
"Here is my Vanguard account with £100K of funds" - how is that "illegal". "I own a property at X address (here are the deeds and latest mortgage statement)" - how is that "illegal".
I guess you regard that asking for proof of income is "illegal" too?
I have rented with several agencies over the years, no one even thought of asking that, just proof of income and references from HR
i guess you would also only rent to British as immigrants could flee to their own countries even if they have property and cash...
Actually I think most landlords learn over decades what they expect different types of tenants to do in the areas they work in. In practice I do exactly the opposite of what you suggest. It is unfortunate but based on the reality of things. In my city and area a lot of the tenants are (or at least were) South Korean postgraduate students - I have found them to be absolutely trustworthy decent people (at least these particular people coming to this particular city for that particular reason). It is all a package deal and a gut feeling based on years of experience as to the likely outcome of various actions.