Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't even look at the credit score. I look at the credit history. Was it good before you got laid off - that shows financial discipline. The fact that you are getting caught up will show on the credit and is a big plus.
I look at 3 things: verification of income, landlord references, and credit report. If 2 out of 3 are good I give leeway on the 3rd. But no professional deadbeats of course. Zero tolerance for liars.
Giving the wrong landlord is a well known ploy. A credit report will show previous residences and that helps a lot, especially if local. If need be drop the LL a postcard to the address you get from the tax department. Google the apartment complex for phone numbers. Also a lot of old school landlords have land lines so old phone directories come in handy.
??? ??? Where did you get that idea? Only one of my four most recent addresses is on my credit report. What business does a LL have getting into my tax returns?
What if the person to whom you pay rent is neither the owner nor a property manager? I"m renting a room from an individual (lessee) who is renting the house - I have never met the landlord.
Pretty close to 1/3 of my applicants give me a false landlord reference. You have to screen with that in mind.
I've never met my landlord because I pay rent to an individual who is the lessee of this house - not the owner / lessor. Which individual is the reference you want?
As a Landlord, I always simply go by the credit rating and also look at the history on the credit record. In general I decline anyone with lower than a 650 score.
However, my brother is a Landlord and he just requires 2 months' security deposit for those with low credit ratings and puts them on a month-to-month lease.
Very few seasoned landlords are interested in the reasons the credit score is weak. The score demonstrates the applicant's resources available to pay his or her bills. An applicant with thin resources -- for whatever reasons -- represents more risk for the landlord.
So an applicant with BK 15 years ago with BK is okay but someone who refused to BK 15 years ago is not okay.
I am totally out of the land lord business now. One of my least favorite tenants got a glowing reference from her prior land lord. Turned out she had given me her Mother's phone number.
I recently had an applicant do that. I declined that application and when the applicant asked me why it was declined? I simply said misrepresentation in an application is automatic decline.
OP, as others have mentioned, when I looked at a new applicant ( I managed apartments in Silicon Valley), it was the credit report I relied on most. I definitely checked landlord references, but they're not often very reliable. Plus, in Silicon Valley, anyway, the trend is to just tell you when they moved in/out. If you ask them if they'd rent to the tenant again, the pat answer is, "If they qualified, we'd rent to them again." Which tells you exactly nothing.
So, when I was looking at applicants, if they had a bad credit score, including charge-offs, I most likely would not have rented to them. And the reason is, mainly, that someone with bad credit is someone who may file bankruptcy. And a tenant in bankruptcy can stall an eviction, and they can include rent they owe their landlord in a bankruptcy. So, anyone who looks like a potential bankruptcy-waiting-to-happen, would be rejected by me. And, unless there were zero other applicants, I'd turn you down.
Plus, just to let you know how landlords have to do business (at least the savvy ones), we have to do everything consistently to keep fair housing off our backs. In Silicon Valley, anyway, there are a lot of non-profits who send out "testers" to see if you discriminate. The best way to never have to worry about the testers, is to have specific criteria that is used to screen all applicants, that you use across the board for every single applicant.
For me, that criteria included no collections, no charge-offs, no judgments, etc.
So, to find a landlord that would take someone with credit problems, usually means a landlord who is offering units that are not desirable to tenants with decent credit. So, you'd probably end up moving into a funky place.
Time-wise, this may not work for you right now - but, something to think about, is that I would always rather take an applicant with a freshly dismissed Chapter 7 bankruptcy than an applicant with bad credit that includes charge-offs, late payments, etc.
The biggest problem with a charge-off, is that the creditor can still sell that bad debt. And it can come back to bite you in the butt. You may be thinking you just need to wait 7 years for it to fall off your report. But, what can happen, is they can sell that bad debt to another creditor who specializes in these bad debts, and they may sit on it until it's been 6+ years, and then get a judgement on the bad debt. And judgements can be renewed every 10 years or so. So, now you have a judgment on your report that may never go away - unless you file bankruptcy.
So, really, you're probably better off just to file bankruptcy. Be sure to choose Chapter 7, if possible. The process takes about 6 months. But, then you have a clean slate. And it wouldn't take long before you can re-establish credit. And landlords are more likely to accept a fresh Chapter 7 than bad credit, because they know you can't file bankruptcy again for at least 7 years.
I recently had an applicant do that. I declined that application and when the applicant asked me why it was declined? I simply said misrepresentation in an application is automatic decline.
Depends on how your application was written. Many applications are written and can be read ambiguously, see my example above.
OP, as others have mentioned, when I looked at a new applicant ( I managed apartments in Silicon Valley), it was the credit report I relied on most. I definitely checked landlord references, but they're not often very reliable. Plus, in Silicon Valley, anyway, the trend is to just tell you when they moved in/out. If you ask them if they'd rent to the tenant again, the pat answer is, "If they qualified, we'd rent to them again." Which tells you exactly nothing.
So, when I was looking at applicants, if they had a bad credit score, including charge-offs, I most likely would not have rented to them. And the reason is, mainly, that someone with bad credit is someone who may file bankruptcy. And a tenant in bankruptcy can stall an eviction, and they can include rent they owe their landlord in a bankruptcy. So, anyone who looks like a potential bankruptcy-waiting-to-happen, would be rejected by me. And, unless there were zero other applicants, I'd turn you down.
Plus, just to let you know how landlords have to do business (at least the savvy ones), we have to do everything consistently to keep fair housing off our backs. In Silicon Valley, anyway, there are a lot of non-profits who send out "testers" to see if you discriminate. The best way to never have to worry about the testers, is to have specific criteria that is used to screen all applicants, that you use across the board for every single applicant.
For me, that criteria included no collections, no charge-offs, no judgments, etc.
So, to find a landlord that would take someone with credit problems, usually means a landlord who is offering units that are not desirable to tenants with decent credit. So, you'd probably end up moving into a funky place.
Time-wise, this may not work for you right now - but, something to think about, is that I would always rather take an applicant with a freshly dismissed Chapter 7 bankruptcy than an applicant with bad credit that includes charge-offs, late payments, etc.
The biggest problem with a charge-off, is that the creditor can still sell that bad debt. And it can come back to bite you in the butt. You may be thinking you just need to wait 7 years for it to fall off your report. But, what can happen, is they can sell that bad debt to another creditor who specializes in these bad debts, and they may sit on it until it's been 6+ years, and then get a judgement on the bad debt. And judgements can be renewed every 10 years or so. So, now you have a judgment on your report that may never go away - unless you file bankruptcy.
So, really, you're probably better off just to file bankruptcy. Be sure to choose Chapter 7, if possible. The process takes about 6 months. But, then you have a clean slate. And it wouldn't take long before you can re-establish credit. And landlords are more likely to accept a fresh Chapter 7 than bad credit, because they know you can't file bankruptcy again for at least 7 years.
For what it's worth. Good luck.
The reason I have bad credit today is that I have never filed bankruptcy - if I had filed bankruptcy 10 or 15 years ago, my credit would not be bad today.
Moral of story: Best to file bankruptcy early than to never file bankruptcy at all.
The reason I have bad credit today is that I have never filed bankruptcy - if I had filed bankruptcy 10 or 15 years ago, my credit would not be bad today.
Moral of story: Best to file bankruptcy early than to never file bankruptcy at all.
None of the credit reports I get go back 15 years. This thread isn't about you.
Judgments can be renewed and therefore can stay on credit reports longer than 15 years. Best to file bankruptcy early than to never file at all.
Exactly. The days are gone when bad credit fell off your report after 7 years. When the crash happened, a new business was born for law firms that specialize in buying up bad debt for pennies on the dollar, and getting judgments.
So, if you'd have just file bankruptcy when you couldn't handle your bills anymore, you'd have used those years toward the time it takes for the BK to fall off your report. Whereas, if you didn't and they get a judgment after you've waited 6 years - you lost 6 years for instance, waiting for it to fall off your report, only to then get a judgment, then file BK and wait 10 more years for it to fall off your report. 16 years to rebuild the credit instead of 10, if you'd just filed BK when the credit tanked initially.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
