What exactly can be said and what can't be said in regards to credit? I've always heard it can't be discussed, but no details.

I know if we deny, we have to send a letter. I know we can't "discuss" their credit scores or details of the report.

Can we say things like "Due to the results of your credit score, we can offer you the unit but will need a double security deposit? Or 1st, last, & security."

I just don't want to ever mess up on a stupid technicality.

See David, from my understanding, you're not allowed to even say that.

I just send the form letter (the one required) if I deny on credit. If the person still calls or texts asking what happened, I just tell them that it was because of their credit and they'll be receiving a form letter from me telling them how to obtain their credit report. I've never had anyone push it after saying that. I don't get into the score or any details.

I recently attended a training by the Idaho Apartment Association. The trainer was trying to get LLs into the mindset of saying "Yes, but" rather than "no". For example, if someone with a credit score below your criteria applies, the best answer might be 'Yes, but we will need a SD equal to 2 month's rent" rather than "no". Same with time on job, previous evictions, etc.

"Those of you that send a form letter without stating specifics, do you tell them before accepting their application that if you decline them you won't be able to give specific reasons?"

The form letter I printed out (and using for years now) just says that an adverse action was taken based on credit and that they can get their own credit report from Transunion. It doesn't have any place to list reasons.

AFAIK there is no law that you have to give specific reasons for denial, in my state at least. Just the form letter, if it's because of the credit report.Maybe other states have more specific rules about this?

Rathdrumgal is on to it.

I have two tenants that applied. They have a unit now and are looking to move. Landlord reference is good and verified. Income is great. Younger couple. Small collections: some medical which I ignore and a few other for $200 here and there. Nice vehicles, not new. Not as old as mine and in good shape.

I'm thinking double deposit and take them. I don't like that route, but if everything is good, how much emphasis do we place on credit??

The girl told me up front her credit is shot due to sickness last year. I don't know how I verify sickness.

All in all, my gut is not screaming for me to run from these folks. More so to make it work.

They actually found someone to take over their current unit and that was verified by current landlord. Also brought a copy of their current lease with rent verified at $100 less than my unit.

"The trainer was trying to get LLs into the mindset of saying "Yes, but" rather than "no". For example, if someone with a credit score below your criteria applies, the best answer might be 'Yes, but we will need a SD equal to 2 month's rent" rather than "no". Same with time on job, previous evictions, etc."

"I am sorry, the application did not pass screening." You will be receiving a letter in the mail that will give you more details.

NE, I find that the less I say, the better. Gives them a chance to argue, whine, wheedle, and blame me for their problems.

First off, I always direct folks to my website where I spell out our criteria. Minimum 3x monthly rent income (verifiable), positive current and past land lord history, we pull background. This ENDS 95% of the problems before they even begin. It's why out of 100 Zillow "I'm SUUUUPER interested in your rental" emails I get maybe 1-2 actual applications. As Barney Fife said, "nip it in the bud."

For the few I get who don't qualify, I tell them the general area they didn't qualify. Most of them are due to bad land lord history or criminal background. I've NEVER, EVER had someone with bad credit and EVERYTHING ELSE was clean. So I steer clear of discussing the credit report. Seriously, ever meet someone with great income, great land lord history, a clean background, but their credit just stinks? I have not. Maybe you have. If I ever get there, I'll have to come up with a new canned response.

Anyway, the ball is now in their court since I didn't deny them: I told them what they can do so we can approve them.

My understanding is that this is a myth that we can't discuss the details of the report with them. (Heck, in some states (California?), I think you even have to give them a copy if requested.)

I have no problem discussing specifics of their report with them if I want to do so.

In fact, especially when I ACCEPT someone with a small ding, I will tell them about it. Several times I have had applicants with great credit except for some odd <$100 debt owed from years ago. I always point those out to them -- and tell them to use CreditKarma or something to go check their report easily -- because they are almost always situations where they didn't even know about it (like some old utility or phone bill from before they moved that they thought was paid in full but apparently wasn't).

- John...

@David, maybe the score you are asking for is too high?

Try, "I did your screening, but your credit report....." and let it hang there; maybe shake your head sadly. They will 99 times out of 100 jump in and beg you to take them with extra deposit.

If they don't fill the silence, you tell them their credit report makes you uncomfortable and ask them if they can pay extra deposit. Or if they have a qualified cosigner, if you accept cosigners.

"It is very rare for me to accept anyone with extra deposit. If I don't like something about them I don't rent to them."

@oregonwoodsmoke

I totally agree on this. The one time I tried this I ended up regretting it.

PMH: And then do you give them the required form explaining how they can get their own credit report and dispute any mistakes?

I get the impression from your posts that you do not do that. This violates the FCRA -- and landlords repeatedly doing exactly that is what keeps making it worse for the rest of us to pull credit reports.

- John...

You can't get around the FCRA that way. You basically said it above: you took an "adverse action" (not accepting them) based on something that you saw on their credit report. If you do that, you MUST send the letter -- or it makes it worse for all of us.

You said that you require at least a 650 credit score and, if they don't meet that, you tell them that they didn't meet your "criteria." Again, you must send the letter in that situation.

You can't cheat your way around it and just say that "my criteria is a 650 credit score, but I didn't deny because of the credit report, I just didn't accept because they didn't meet that criteria."

Sorry, but again, landlords like you that cheat the FCRA are what makes it harder for the rest of us to run credit reports. :(

- John...

You are cheating. Just admit that you do it. That's fine. I don't see why you keep denying it.

You flat out said that if their credit score isn't high enough, then you don't take them. That alone means that you have taken an "adverse action" and the FCRA REQUIRES that you give them a letter documenting the credit pull and how they can get their own copy to dispute it.

If you aren't sending that letter, then you are violating the law. Period.

It doesn't matter how "up front" you are with them about your "criteria." If you don't accept them based on their credit score -- which is exactly what you just said that you are doing -- then you must give them the FCRA required letter. Period.

You either do it properly or you don't. That's up to you, of course -- but don't pretend that you aren't cheating the system by not following the law. That's exactly what you are doing.

- John...

Again, I've said it repeatedly, but you don't seem to get it. "Not accepted" is still considered by law to be an "adverse action." You CANNOT get around it by going "I didn't deny them, I just didn't accept them." The law does NOT say that you have to do it if you "deny" them. It says that if you take ANY "adverse action" based on their report, then you must follow the law. You "not accepting" them is absolutely an "adverse action."

You keep saying it is "simple" -- and I completely agree that it is. But you're the one that seems to be missing it, not me.

- John...