the WORK NUMBER (by AW [CA]) Oct 6, 2017 11:57 AM
the WORK NUMBER (by Martin [CO]) Oct 6, 2017 12:08 PM
the WORK NUMBER (by S i d [MO]) Oct 6, 2017 12:31 PM
the WORK NUMBER (by Still Learning [NH]) Oct 6, 2017 12:31 PM
the WORK NUMBER (by WMH [NC]) Oct 6, 2017 1:04 PM
the WORK NUMBER (by AW [CA]) Oct 6, 2017 1:08 PM
the WORK NUMBER (by BRAD 20,000 [IN]) Oct 6, 2017 4:02 PM
the WORK NUMBER (by NC INVESTOR [NC]) Oct 7, 2017 10:21 AM
the WORK NUMBER (by AW [CA]) Posted on: Oct 6, 2017 11:57 AM Message:
State Specific Question About: CALIFORNIA (CA)
I have an applicant who works for Walgreen. I can only verify through the Work Number. Do I ask applicant to pay for this additional $42.95 fee?
I call the location where he works, but no one would tell me if the applicant works there.
Thanks in advance. --172.89.xx.xxx |
the WORK NUMBER (by Martin [CO]) Posted on: Oct 6, 2017 12:08 PM Message:
I would absolutely have the applicant pay for it. I'm not paying $40+ for somebody that may not even qualify.
If they won't pay for it, then they will need to move on to a landlord who does not perform background checks. If they *do* pay for it, that is a pretty good sign that they will qualify. They wouldn't bother to pay $42.95 if they know that they are going to fail your check.
If you are having trouble filling a vacancy, and this applicant qualifies in every other way, and seems like a slam dunk, then the best I would do is to offer to apply half of the cost to their first month's rent if they eventually sign a lease with you. That way, they pay for it up front, and if they fail your application process, the cost is all on them. But if they pass, you are showing them that you appreciate how much this costs.
The fact is, it isn't their fault that their company is causing this unreasonable burden. I feel bad for them. Walgreen's should be ashamed of themselves for adding a cost like this for every time an employee needs to apply for housing.
--174.29.xx.xxx |
the WORK NUMBER (by S i d [MO]) Posted on: Oct 6, 2017 12:31 PM Message:
For applicants like this, we have several strategies:
1) Last 2 months of Pay stubs. After conditional approval, require one more stub with a date AFTER the date of application. This proves they weren't fired when they applied.
2) 2 months of banks statements. Same deal regarding one more statement after conditional approval...
3) Phrase your question the right way when talking to HR. I've found it is possible to get information in spite of corporate polices. "Mary, I'm not asking about Bob's salary. But what would someone with X-job title with Y-years of experience typically earn?"
4) Go to his/her workplace and meet his boss / see his cubical or workstation with his/her name on it.
Last resort: Applicant pays the full fee.
It's up to the applicant to prove income, not me. --173.19.xx.xxx |
the WORK NUMBER (by Still Learning [NH]) Posted on: Oct 6, 2017 12:31 PM Message:
Corporate or works at the Walgreens around the corner? If they have passed the rest of screening would you consider a work around of seeing them at work and they provide pay stubs? --65.46.xxx.xxx |
the WORK NUMBER (by WMH [NC]) Posted on: Oct 6, 2017 1:04 PM Message:
Call and ask to speak with THEM. If they don't work there, you will be told, "No one here by that name." If they do but are not there, you will be told, "They are not here right now."
Then verify income via stubs and statements. --173.22.xx.xx |
the WORK NUMBER (by AW [CA]) Posted on: Oct 6, 2017 1:08 PM Message:
Thank all you very much. --172.89.xx.xxx |
the WORK NUMBER (by BRAD 20,000 [IN]) Posted on: Oct 6, 2017 4:02 PM Message:
AW,
We START with paystubs included with the app. Many snap a pic with their phone and text it to us.
Local store? Go there. Find the applicant and together chat with the manager.
I like W's "call and ask for them".
Here's the problem I'm concerned about - we took an applicant with paystubs. The manager who had verified employment was kind enough to call us 2 days later and give us a heads up that the applicant had been on probation and was now fired. Stopped that one before passing keys.
Had another who was on probation, took possession, then let go 2 weeks later. Long eviction.
Overall, we do all the easy screening first. Somethign else might bump the application making employment a non-issue.
BRAD
--68.50.xx.xxx |
the WORK NUMBER (by NC INVESTOR [NC]) Posted on: Oct 7, 2017 10:21 AM Message:
Many of our tenants work for either Wells Fargo or Bank of America and both companies will only verify through an online service that costs around $50. The applicants always pay. They have to pay for credit reports and any other screening why would this be different.
The reason so many large corps. have chosen this method is besides the number of requests they get, they are protected from managers who disclosure confidential information i.e. on probation.
--75.181.xxx.xx |
Reply:
|
|