Re: Can I eliminate this candidate? - Landlord Forum thread

Re: Can I eliminate this candidate? by Anna Mouse on June 21, 2012 @01:24

If I am right ...

Either way my question is why are we not concerned the husband has a job? Don't you require all people applying to be empoyed? Do you require a minimume income on each applicant?

You get to pick the criteria as long as you apply the criteria in the same manner with ever person who applies.

[ Reply ] [ Return to forum ]

Re: typo by Anonymous on June 21, 2012 @01:25	[ Reply ]

The husband has not a job? wait, what? He does not go to work?

Re: Can I eliminate this candidate? by P-Bone in WNY (NY) on June 21, 2012 @07:44	[ Reply ]

This is a tough call. When it comes to married couples, I treat them like the IRS. I treat them as if they had one income. Either one for both, or both added together. It's really hard to expect every spouse in a married couple to have a full time job and possibly a family. My mother was never employed through most of my younger life, but my father always brought home enough to support the family. What do you say to a traditional family that has one parent home 24/7? Especially if the other parent makes more than enough. Personally, in this case, if I had a signed application and I was able to determine that the tenant lied about the owner of their current residence or landlord, I would disqualify based on inaccurate data in the application if I couldn't find another reason to disqualify them through screening and I still felt they were a possible high risk. You can always ask to view their current residence and look for evidence of a pet.

Re: Can I eliminate this candidate? by jannie (IL) on June 21, 2012 @09:34	[ Reply ]

I don't have as much of a problem with the unemployed husband who gets 1200 a month in unemployment, but I am surprised at the amount a home health care worker made according to her. She didn't indicate she was a supervisor, but wrote worker. I really need proof of income. I'm also concerned about the stray dog that is running loose. The LL lives near his rental. He stated the tenant didn't have a dog, but proceeded to mention the dog that runs loose. I better drive by; I want to have all my bases covered.

Re: Can I eliminate this candidate? by Frances (MN) on June 21, 2012 @12:06	[ Reply ]

Wrong landlord info is enough to disqualify them. No need to check for a loose dog near their current residence.

Re: Can I eliminate this candidate? by Bunny MAGIC on June 22, 2012 @17:55	[ Reply ]

It IS highly doubtful that she makes that much money as a home health care worker. A look at their tax returns should clarify things, and I believe this is legal and part of the screening process. If I'm incorrect, someone please correct me. Thanks! Bun

Re: Can I eliminate this candidate? by Jake on June 21, 2012 @11:26	[ Reply ]

"What do you say to a traditional family that has one parent home 24/7?" Unfortunately, the "traditional family" rarely exist anymore. When they do, they are more likely to own their home and not rent. Only 48% of working class living together are married. Those will make far less than enough to support a family on the part time jobs available today that hover around minimum wage. And, it is a mistake for some landlords to view unemployment payments as a dependable asset to pay rent.

Re: Can I eliminate this candidate? by The Dude (MN) on June 21, 2012 @11:36	[ Reply ]

Totally agree. If your income is stable enough and you have the family values that one parent stays at home, you are almost always going to own a home and not be renting. And I totally agree unemployment income is not stable income to count on for getting your rent.

Re: Can I eliminate this candidate? by P-Bone in WNY (NY) on June 21, 2012 @17:08	[ Reply ]

I don't disagree with any of those statemens given the current economic situation, but honestly, I still treat the situation this way. If there is a binding agreement (marriage license) between two people, I consider their income as one. If there is no binding agreement (boyfriend/girlfriend or roommates) then I consider their income separate. I don't consider this discrimination because of teh legal binding nature of finances with regard to marriages. As stated, I treat it similar to the IRS.