Updating post from Reddit.
I know the answer already... But just want to sense check..
I have perspective tenants looking to rent a property - they seemed great at the viewing and during communications.
However - they didn't own up to having CCJs, and on doing a credit check, there's 3 CCJs between the 2 of them. 2 have been paid off and 1 is still being paid.
There is a payment plan in place.
Gut is saying no... But I'm still considering them on the basis that they're being paid off/majority are paid off and from about 5 years ago.
Anyone else have any thoughts on whether it's worth taking the risk, or if the chance are there could be a headache in the future?
Previous landlord reference is fine (but don't really think they're worth the paper they're printed on)
1 CCJ and telling you is one thing.
3 CCJs and not being upfront? Not a chance.
They were dishonest about the CCJs, can't believe you're even asking. Plenty of honest people looking for somewhere to live who won't lie to you.
No. Just no
If they've done it before, they'll do it again. Just make sure they don't do it to you.
You sound like your out of touch with reality
no
The acid test here is whether you can get rent guarantee insurance with such a credit profile. If the answer is no (and considering the current direction of the Rent Reform bill) then you really need to consider carefully if this risk is within your appetite.
Maybe not relevant to this case but something to always have in the back of your mind is that orders of possession which also include a financial judgement do not automatically create a CCJ. For this reason I fear the credit check process is extremely flawed and hence will always recommend using the “rent guarantee” insurance threshold as the ultimate guide to making these types of decisions.
Yea that's a good point. I use OpenRents recommended RGI (not sure how good they are? - luckily haven't had to put in a claim before).
Who do you use for rent guarantee insurance?
Direct Line and Goodlord which are effectively outsourced to ARAG.
As long as your paperwork is up to scratch and all your referencing is clean as a whistle then they appear to be fairly good. I have heard that the moment there is a single blemish then things can get complicated but I think that is true for any insurance company nowadays. This does mean you can’t be as flexible with tenants as you may have been in the past which is a shame but it’s the price to pay if you want legal / rental insurance.
Throw that application in to the bin. Tenants will be a bunch of perpetual headaches. Excuses for late rent or no rent will flow towards you like a burst dam. Wait for the right tenants. Again... ALWAYS WAIT FOR THE RIGHT TENANTS!
No
Hell no
>However - they didn't own up to having CCJs, and on doing a credit check, there's 3 CCJs between the 2 of them. 2 have been paid off and 1 is still being paid.
This is about as clear cut red flag as you're ever going to get. CCJs are not handed out for no reason. 3 indicates they're either financially unstable or reckless. You're already know they're liars.
No. The market is simply not in a state where this is a sensible risk to take.
One CCJ several years ago I could just about go with, but multiple undisclosed CCJs ? Nooooo
One CCJ, = automatic rejection. No, thanks.
Three CCJs = Jaw drop, eyebrow raise, a chuckle... then an automatic rejection.
You'd need to be insane to take on that risk.
Yea agreed. I'd rather keep it empty for another month than take the risk.
What about 3cjjs from 6 years ago, not showing in credit file? Whats difference? If they are not paid, its clearly risk, but 2 paid and 1 still being paid, all from 5 years ago with ok reference from previous LL? Circumstances matter. If someone want to, he can make problems, no matter how clean his file is...
While i agree with managing risk, overly high expectations makes LL's so loved 😒
Expecting a total of zero CCJs isn't exactly "having high expectations". You don't get a CCJ just for failing to pay a couple of instalments one off.
You agree with risk assessment, but are seemingly terrible at it. <10% of the adult population has a CCJ. It's a huge risk to take on. Why would you do something so reckless when you get 50 other applicants with nothing on their record at all?
Also, nobody became a landlord to be loved by their tenants, if you think that then you're the one with strange expectations.
"NO tenant is better than a bad tenant." Is something my first boss drummed into me... This is more true now than ever.
We would not put forward a tenant with any CCJs to a LL paid, unpaid in dispute or not. There is nothing a tenant can say or do to change this.
What do they do for a living?
By the number of CCJs they have, professional defaulters.
I struggle to get a viewing on UC with excellent credit score. And with a guarantor if I needed
Hell no
Oh my god NO what are you thinking
No, if you have ever had to evict tenants like that then you will realise that is a hell no!!!!
I had a ccj from 2020 I didn't know how important getting one was and I was earning nmw. I now earn double and have paid loads off a dmp for a few years. Which had left my credit score shit which may have not helped looking to rent but our current landlord didn't seem to have a problem with it.
When you have 10 clean more suitable candidates, its other thing. You go for best one. Just saying that if perspective candidate have 5 yo spot on file which he trying to get rid of, and don't have other red flags. He shouldn't be disqualified just because of it.
>Just saying that if perspective candidate have 5 yo spot on file which he trying to get rid of, and don't have other red flags. He shouldn't be disqualified just because of it.
I agree with you, and if it was just 1 CCJ that was paid off or being paid then fair enough. But 3 between 2 people makes me very nervous
Some people do not have any bill paying discipline or have a bill paying phobia. There was an uncle like this in our family. Bills lay unopened in a pile on the floor by the door, binning them when looking at them got to be too much hoping they would stop sending them. He was rubbish at paying before playing on paydays.
Yours might not be bad people, but with multiple ccjs, they have a problem managing their finances. Not worth exposing yourself to possible rent arrears down the line. Rent to tenants who are responsible and deserving, but more importantly ...honest.
Easy answer no
Get rent guarantee insurance. Ensure tenants pass the insurance companies criteria. Don’t take unnecessary risks with huge financial implications.
They won't receive the Rent Guarantee if they have a CCJ history.
Could you be the potential tenants asking this question? A big NO would be the answer either way
Run for the hills. Can’t take the risk and it’s only going to get worse. Remember if they decide they don’t need to pay (and they have history) then you could be 18 months out of pocket. Just seems a risk that isn’t worth taking
Ask then!
TBF i never had one, and i got good Credit score However i find it insulting and harassing to provide full banking statements (instead of giving my income proof), or let someone off street go through my credit file 🤷♂️
>or let someone off street go through my credit file 🤷♂️
A landlord isn't someone off the street though? You think it's OK for a phone provider to do a credit check before agreeing to you signing up for a £30 a month phone contract, yet you have a problem with a landlord doing a check when the monthly rent is much higher / and a house is worth a lot more than a phone....
When a credit referencing company ask for bank statements it's just a file going from one financial institution to another. The credit referencing institution don't pass on this information to the agent or landlord they just assess ability to pay and give a pass or fail response.
Your bank can see your spending activity so what does it matter if a credit referencing agency can see it? It's not like the person doing the background referencing knows you personally.
I had a guarantor that refused to give bank statements permission to the referencing agency and so referencing couldn't be completed so they were rejected not by LL but by the existing tenants as their contract was a joint tenancy so all tenants liable if any one stops paying and the tenants themselves were uncomfortable with the risk.
Ironic that the LL would take the risk but the pre-existing tenants when they realized they would be on the hook wouldn't.
To OP with the renters reform bill likely to become law in the term of the tenancy I think you would be bonkers to take this risk. The non disclosure of the situation would be all that's needed for me to discount them.