Letting Agents requesting very private data prior to viewing

aloooof

I've recently begun looking for a new apartment to move into my with girlfriend, and an increasing number of Letting Agents are requesting very private data, such as 3 months of bank account statements and payslips prior to even getting a viewing of an apartment.

This seems excessive to me and I'm very reluctant to hand it out at this point in the process. Does anyone know if they are within their rights to ask for that without even having done a viewing?

I realise competition for places is very high at the moment, so am wondering if other people are providing this information prior to a viewing??

Ms Doubtfire1

Payslips is normal - or a p60. But bank statements? no way in hell

myshirt

Quite standard at the moment unfortunately.

They are nothing short of asking for a picture of you with the pope.

Dravokivich

Last time I went through a letting agent, all I needed was the following:

Reference letter from current LandLord
Reference letter from current employer
Proof of current address
Proof of ID

They do not need to see your banking history or payslips for any period of time. I'd find that quite excessive and consider challenging or just walking away from anyone inquiring about it. It's none of their business really.

Samuel T. Cogley

This sort of stuff should not be requested until the tenancy has been offered and if you want to can make a complaint to the Data Protection Commissioner. However it's quite normal for I to be requested and quite necessary unfortunately as Ireland does not have a proper credit referencing system.

Everyone has a choice, if you're not willing to provide this information don't rent from the LL or agents requesting it, but the majority do.

aloooof

Thanks for replies all, seems very excessive to me, so I'm going to question it, and if that's an issue, will just refrain from using them.

Both rental and buying markets seems to be in a sorry state at the moment...

maximoose

I started a similar thread before (christ, 2 years ago?!)

I ended up redacting certain things, but playing ball to an extent because we wanted the apartment.

I did email the Data Protection Commissioner and got a brief 1-2 line email saying it wasn't beyond expectations :rolleyes:

aloooof

maximoose wrote: »

I started a similar thread before (christ, 2 years ago?!)

I ended up redacting certain things, but playing ball to an extent because we wanted the apartment.

I did email the Data Protection Commissioner and got a brief 1-2 line email saying it wasn't beyond expectations :rolleyes:

Cheers for the reply, just had a look at the thread.

It looks like you were asked to provide this after being offered the tenancy? I could understand that to a point, and would reluctantly provide it if that was the case but in my case, they're looking for it before we've even gotten a viewing! Just seems ludicrous to me.

I signed a lease recently and at the viewing I provided payslips and a bank statement for my savings account showing I make regular deposits, along with references. However, I mainly did this because I'm a postgrad student and my OH is currently out of work, so I knew otherwise we'd most likely be ignored if we didn't provide proof of ability to pay the rent. If we were both working I probably would have just included our work references, unless asked for more info.

If you don't want to give this info then you don't have to, but if it's a place you really like you have to accept you might be looked over if you choose not to play ball with them!

Zillah

This is exactly the sort of impunity they can get away with when the (sellers) market is in such a sorry state. Really should be the other way around: making an effort to convince someone the home is worth renting.

Samuel T. Cogley

Zillah wrote: »

This is exactly the sort of impunity they can get away with when the (sellers) market is in such a sorry state. Really should be the other way around: making an effort to convince someone the home is worth renting.

It's hardly impunity. LL's are fecked if a tenant doesn't pay rent. There are very sensible controls in place is other countries help prevent this, but Ireland like so many things is the wild west in this regard. None of the option we have are enough on their own to be proof positive someone will pay. I have personally given a false* reference for a friend of mine. If I can do it, so can other people.

Bank statements prove a couple of things. i) You have been paying rent ii) you have a few quid so that if a LL has to spend 18 months perusing you through the RTB, the court and finally through enforcement it's going to be possible to recover even a fraction of what is owed.

Tenants are not to blame for this. Landlords are not to blame for this. It's the feckless, populist, lazy legislature that won't properly sort the issue out. If one doesn't like it as a tenant in a LL's market don't engage with it and live in Kerry. Is someone going to rent off a LL in a tenants market out of the goodness of their heart?

*False as in I had rented to him, I had not.

big syke

Excessive yes 100% agree - it is maddening.

But unfortunately you have two choices 1) conform to these practices and be in with a chance of getting a property 2) Basically tell them fooook off, its a disgrace asking for private info, data protection etc. and have no chance of getting the property.

jimmycrackcorm

Zillah wrote:

This is exactly the sort of impunity they can get away with when the (sellers) market is in such a sorry state. Really should be the other way around: making an effort to convince someone the home is worth renting.

As a tenant you get access to an asset with hundreds of thousands. So you think a two line note saying Im alright Jack should be sufficient?

You have to provide similar information if you want to apply to get a small loan for a fraction of that.

big syke

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

As a tenant you get access to an asset with hundreds of thousands. So you think a two line note saying Im alright Jack should be sufficient?

You have to provide similar information if you want to apply to get a small loan for a fraction of that.

Well no a reference from a previous landlord outlining that rent has been paid in full on time and that they are a good tenant etc is more than sufficient for a good landlord to make a business decision.

Regarding the entire Loan argument - you get to keep the asset/service/whatever you use the loan to pay for so that's a pointless argument.

dudara

A loan is granted by a financial institute bound by appropriate regulation and data privacy laws. The data is gathered, processed and stored in accordance with the purpose for which it is gathered.

Unfortunately, it's not so clearly defined or managed in the rental sector. I'm of the opinion that I will gladly provide landlord references, work references followed by PPN and ID if required for the RTB. But financial information is not going to be shared. My salary is confidential between me, my employer, the Revenue and institutes that offer financial credit. I'm not sharing that information willy nilly with anyone.

Pkiernan

Zillah wrote: »

This is exactly the sort of impunity they can get away with when the (sellers) market is in such a sorry state. Really should be the other way around: making an effort to convince someone the home is worth renting.

Sure. ..It's great to find out you are renting to deadbeats who don't pay, and know that the system sides with them all the way.

Boater123

big syke wrote: »

Well no a reference from a previous landlord outlining that rent has been paid in full on time and that they are a good tenant etc is more than sufficient for a good landlord to make a business decision.

And that would be a bad business decision.

The one reference could be completely made up. Or it's the previous LL just trying to get rid of a bad tenant and would say anything to do so.

And even if it was genuine, it still doesn't show that someone can pay rent now, only that they have paid it in the past.

Rent paid should be no more than 33% of a persons income. Any more and something will not get paid sooner or later. It's usually the rent that stops first.

A tenant needs to prove they can cover the rent, especially in today's rental market. Can you think of a better way of proving it than payslips or bank statements.

Too many LL burned by bad tenants, legislation that favours rightly or wrongly the tenant, and no proper credit checks in this country are the reasons why this is necessary.

However personal financial data should not be necessary before a viewing. It feels a bit like when EA's try to find out how much property buyers are mortgage approved for in order to squeeze a few more bucks from them

dr.fuzzenstein

Of course the LL can have a printed reference from my previous LL, reference from my employer, P60, P45, bank statements, copy of my police record, insurance information, copy of my will and medical records.

<snip>
Get a lie detector, interview friends and family, talk to the HR manager?
At some stage it will just get silly.
Besides, the biggest scumbags will always have the best references.

dr.fuzzenstein

I'm merely pointing out what will happen when a ridiculous amount of documentation is requested. And it will happen.
If I give this info to my bank, it is handled in accordance to procedure. If I give it to Mick renting out a flat, it will lie on his kitchen table on view to his wife, his kids and every fecker walking through his house before ending up in his bin. Does Mick have a proper service for the confidential destruction of sensitive documents? I don't bloody think so. How do I know Mick is not a scamster?

gizmo81

We gave bank statements as requested but I redacted every piece of information bar my address and name on the statement, they didn't say anything except my details with the iban and bic.

Samuel T. Cogley

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

I'm merely pointing out what will happen when a ridiculous amount of documentation is requested. And it will happen.
If I give this info to my bank, it is handled in accordance to procedure. If I give it to Mick renting out a flat, it will lie on his kitchen table on view to his wife, his kids and every fecker walking through his house before ending up in his bin. Does Mick have a proper service for the confidential destruction of sensitive documents? I don't bloody think so. How do I know Mick is not a scamster?

Mick, if he's like me and doesn't use an agent will simply want sight of them, ideally through mobile banking there and then. I would ask to be shown the rent payment to the previous LL. As for the slippery slope argent it's a red herring IMO. What LLs and agents are trying to do is 'credit check' tenants. That's it. It's a perfectly normal, standard practice done all around the world. It's just that Ireland is arseways about it.

I'd much prefer a reference from HR, a quick call to confirm, a reference from the previous LL, quick call to confirm and a credit score. Life would be much easier for everyone. That way it wouldn't matter if the person was on 20K a year or 200K it would come down to how well they manage their finances. How else am I know?

And before anyone starts, yes, I am more than happy for the tenant to see the mortgage account is up to date and that I gave an adequate balance in my P&L account to cover issues such as something breaking down. I also wish it was the done thing for tenants to be able to contact the previous tenants to get a ref of the Landlord, sadly it's not.

gizmo81

I think landlords are just trying to circumvent the legislation regarding rent allowance.

They should ban landlords from seeking work references and seeing bank transactions if the legislation is to work as intended.

At the end of the day theres a contract and we uniquely in Ireland have a process for enforcing that contract in the RTB, everything else should be irrelevant.

davo10

These types of threads are as common as those about nightmare tenants and landlords. All LLs want to try and be as sure as possible that the person they are renting their property to is going to pay their rent and look after it. Personally I wouldn't ask for bank statements, I don't see the benefit, the tenant you have €10k in it today but €0 in it tomorrow. I ask for first month, last month plus equivalent of 1 month deposit (3 in total) from tenants plus reference and phone number of previous LL. If that's objectionable to some, no bother, get out of the way, there is another person who wants to rent behind you.

If the LL has set that criteria for selecting a tenant in a bulging market, then that's his/her prerogative. There is no requirement to agree to it, but someone else probably will and they will get the property. In a particular area, that EA might have multiple properties so refusal may prevent you from renting the others as well.

Deub

Is it possible in Ireland to ask the future tenant to have someone (usually parents) as guarantor?
So if the tenant doesn't pay, the parents are responsible and need to pay.

gizmo81

Why? There's a contract and it's enforceable through the RTB. If there's a guarantor you will have to go through the courts first.

Deub wrote: »

Is it possible in Ireland to ask the future tenant to have someone (usually parents) as guarantor?
So if the tenant doesn't pay, the parents are responsible and need to pay.

davo10

Deub wrote: »

Is it possible in Ireland to ask the future tenant to have someone (usually parents) as guarantor?
So if the tenant doesn't pay, the parents are responsible and need to pay.

It's an equally difficult process to force a parent to pay. Besides, how do you ask a 40 year old to get their parents to guarantee the rent.

quadrifoglio verde

Landlords want the best tenant. Not just any tenant.
They're limited by the price that they can charge now, so picking the best tenant of the bunch is the way to go.

It could take 12-18 months to get a non paying tenant out. Why would you risk it?

gizmo81

Is this one of those urban legends, i can't believe it's taking over a year to evict a tenant.

Graham

gizmo81 wrote: »

Is this one of those urban legends, i can't believe it's taking over a year to evict a tenant.

It happens more often than you would expect. A few posters have suggested things are changing (slowly).

Samuel T. Cogley

gizmo81 wrote: »

Is this one of those urban legends, i can't believe it's taking over a year to evict a tenant.

Why?

Ireland has historically been very pro-tenant and very anti-violation of the dwelling. The historic reasons for this are clear. You have to issue the relevant notices, get a date with the RTB, get a decision, go through the appeals process (probably) and then, and only then will you get to enforce that decision.

When enforcing that decision a judge has to weight the right to private property of the LL vs the inviolability of the the dwelling of the tenant and that they are potentially being made homeless. Unsurprisingly Judges give the tenant time to vacate and possibly extensions depending on the circumstances. 12 months is conservative.

While this is going on the tenant is at best not paying rent and at worst, ****ting in black plastic bags and ripping all the wiring out. If the tenant has no money recovery of any damages is impossible. If the have money it's merely improbable.

If you don't want to rent, it's simple buy your own place. If you can't then expect a LL to try and protect their investment. 70% of LLs have less than three (or is it four) properties. Massive numbers of those would get out if they could. Who do you think you'll be able to rent off of if the situation is made any worse. We already have to:

- Rent below market rate
- Pay over 50% in income tax
- Consider someone on rent allowance/HAP the same as someone who we can take on with out the rigmarole of SW paperwork and the knowledge that if an SW officer is in a bad mood the rent will be stopped.
- Have to deal with an incredibly pro-tenant arbitration panel
- Have very little means to vet tenants.

Enough is enough.

I'm all for helping people who can't afford a home. No one should be homeless. I do that by being tax compliant. It's not up to private landlords to solve the social housing crisis anymore than it's Tesco's job to feed the hungry.

Here we go

Maybe away around the law about not discriminating against rent allowance they see if you have a wage or not and say yes or no on there findings or just to find how high they can push up rent to your affordability

Paz-CCFC

Landlords, as data controllers, have an obligation under the Data Protection Act to ensure that the data they collect is not excessive for the purpose that it's collected.

There was a similar discussion on here a few months ago. See p20-21, Case Study 5 of this document. It seems that only after the tenant has been accepted, should the landlord be requesting things like PPSN, utilities, bank account details etc. At the application stage, it looks like the DPC's view is that it is excessive and the landlord has no business collecting this kind of data.

If you feel strongly enough about it, report the landlord to the DPC. Whilst there are valid points about landlords being in a tough position regarding tenants overholding without paying rent, breaching another piece of legislation isn't the way to go about tackling that issue.

Samuel T. Cogley

Paz-CCFC wrote: »

Landlords, as data controllers, have an obligation under the Data Protection Act to ensure that the data they collect is not excessive for the purpose that it's collected.

There was a similar discussion on here a few months ago. See p20-21, Case Study 5 of this document. It seems that only after the tenant has been accepted, should the landlord be requesting things like PPSN, utilities, bank account details etc. At the application stage, it looks like the DPC's view is that it is excessive and the landlord has no business collecting this kind of data.

If you feel strongly enough about it, report the landlord to the DPC. Whilst there are valid points about landlords being in a tough position regarding tenants overholding without paying rent, breaching another piece of legislation isn't the way to go about tackling that issue.

+1. As vital as this data is, it should not be collected at the application stage. Agents doing so should be reported.

the_syco

gizmo81 wrote: »

They should ban landlords from seeking work references and seeing bank transactions if the legislation is to work as intended.

Sounds like proof of being able to pay.

gizmo81 wrote: »

At the end of the day theres a contract and we uniquely in Ireland have a process for enforcing that contract in the RTB, everything else should be irrelevant.

RTB are generally seen as useless for the landlords.

Stoner

Zillah wrote:

This is exactly the sort of impunity they can get away with when the (sellers) market is in such a sorry state. Really should be the other way around: making an effort to convince someone the home is worth renting.

At the end of the day they want to make sure they will get paid, I'm sure that is their motivation

gizmo81

I've been through the RTB it's not pro-tenant. Though I won my case.

Rents are double market rate currently. If you consider 1700 market rate and not the false economy it is then you're part of the problem.

Rightly so, you cannot discriminate against someone because they are disabled or out of work. no business can so LL can't get an exemption.

I don't think vetting counts for anything, there's a contract, and you can enforce it through RTB.

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Why?

Ireland has historically been very pro-tenant and very anti-violation of the dwelling. The historic reasons for this are clear. You have to issue the relevant notices, get a date with the RTB, get a decision, go through the appeals process (probably) and then, and only then will you get to enforce that decision.

When enforcing that decision a judge has to weight the right to private property of the LL vs the inviolability of the the dwelling of the tenant and that they are potentially being made homeless. Unsurprisingly Judges give the tenant time to vacate and possibly extensions depending on the circumstances. 12 months is conservative.

While this is going on the tenant is at best not paying rent and at worst, ****ting in black plastic bags and ripping all the wiring out. If the tenant has no money recovery of any damages is impossible. If the have money it's merely improbable.

If you don't want to rent, it's simple buy your own place. If you can't then expect a LL to try and protect their investment. 70% of LLs have less than three (or is it four) properties. Massive numbers of those would get out if they could. Who do you think you'll be able to rent off of if the situation is made any worse. We already have to:

- Rent below market rate
- Pay over 50% in income tax
- Consider someone on rent allowance/HAP the same as someone who we can take on with out the rigmarole of SW paperwork and the knowledge that if an SW officer is in a bad mood the rent will be stopped.
- Have to deal with an incredibly pro-tenant arbitration panel
- Have very little means to vet tenants.

Enough is enough.

I'm all for helping people who can't afford a home. No one should be homeless. I do that by being tax compliant. It's not up to private landlords to solve the social housing crisis anymore than it's Tesco's job to feed the hungry.

gizmo81

Personally, I don't think we need more private landlords in fact we need less and better quality. As posters said it's not their problem to solve the homeless crisis

No landlord should be allowed to directly let, instead using a third party and all must pay a deposit to RTB like the tenants.

bmwguy

I enjoy reading this forum, don't post too often in it but one thing I take out of most threads is the fact I am glad I am neither a tenant nor a landlord anymore. I rented for a couple of years and I even let out my house for a year when I moved away for work. Both were relatively straightforward straightforward compared to what goes on out there.

The rent cap is a good thing in that it protects tenants now there needs to be a proper system to protect landlords. Market is so dysfunctional at the moment its a joke. Landlords are terrified tenants won't pay and there is nothing they can really do about it.

athtrasna

Mod note

Can we get back on topic please

Samuel T. Cogley

gizmo81 wrote: »

I've been through the RTB it's not pro-tenant. Though I won my case.

Rents are double market rate currently. If you consider 1700 market rate and not the false economy it is then you're part of the problem.

Rightly so, you cannot discriminate against someone because they are disabled or out of work. no business can so LL can't get an exemption.

I don't think vetting counts for anything, there's a contract, and you can enforce it through RTB.

I'm sorry but you have no idea what you're talking about re enforcement. That's exactly why LL's are having to request this info.

The rest of the points don't relate to the OP so given the mods instructions I'll not address those.

If anyone has a suggestion for how one actually proves payment of rent previously without resorting to bank statements I'd be delighted to hear it, I'm open to better ways of doing things.

athtrasna

big syke do not post on this thread again

Mod

aloooof

Thanks for replies all, just catching up on this thread now.

Boater123 wrote: »

A tenant needs to prove they can cover the rent, especially in today's rental market. Can you think of a better way of proving it than payslips or bank statements.

A tenant. But not every applicant before they've even viewed the place (which I accept you concede here later on).

Boater123 wrote: »

However personal financial data should not be necessary before a viewing. It feels a bit like when EA's try to find out how much property buyers are mortgage approved for in order to squeeze a few more bucks from them

davo10 wrote: »

If the LL has set that criteria for selecting a tenant in a bulging market, then that's his/her prerogative. There is no requirement to agree to it, but someone else probably will and they will get the property. In a particular area, that EA might have multiple properties so refusal may prevent you from renting the others as well.

I don't agree with this. If that criteria is to see the past 3 months of Bank Statements and Payslips for every applicant, then it's beyond reasonable, imo. And also in the opinion of the Data Protection Commisioner it would seem, as evidenced by this post:

Paz-CCFC wrote: »

Landlords, as data controllers, have an obligation under the Data Protection Act to ensure that the data they collect is not excessive for the purpose that it's collected.

There was a similar discussion on here a few months ago. See p20-21, Case Study 5 of this document. It seems that only after the tenant has been accepted, should the landlord be requesting things like PPSN, utilities, bank account details etc. At the application stage, it looks like the DPC's view is that it is excessive and the landlord has no business collecting this kind of data.

If you feel strongly enough about it, report the landlord to the DPC. Whilst there are valid points about landlords being in a tough position regarding tenants overholding without paying rent, breaching another piece of legislation isn't the way to go about tackling that issue.

Appreciate the replies, I think this is the advice I'm going to go with, and only if there is an offer of tenancy. If that rules me out of viewing some properties, so be it.

gizmo81 wrote: »

We gave bank statements as requested but I redacted every piece of information bar my address and name on the statement, they didn't say anything except my details with the iban and bic.

davo10

Op you might consider it beyond reasonable, but a LL may argue that it is reasonable to ensure that the tenant is capable of paying the rent. To me, it's a complete waste of time asking for bank statements and I wouldn't do it, but then other LL would not ask for the equivalent of 3 month's rent up front. I've been told a good few times that it is unreasonable to ask for this, but at the same time my properties have never been empty. Every LL wants to try and minimise risk, there is no definitive way to do this as the more you try, the more unreasonable tenants think it is. What is difinitive though, is the fact that errant tenants are a huge problem for property owners.

Boater123

aloooof wrote: »

A tenant. But not every applicant before they've even viewed the place (which I accept you concede here later on)

I made two points in my post. One addressed the post to which I was replying, that one reference was not enough to hand over the keys.

The second point I made was that there was no need for such data until at least the stage where the prospective tenant has viewed and declared that they actually want the property.

I conceded nothing

aloooof

Boater123 wrote: »

I made two points in my post. One addressed the post to which I was replying, that one reference was not enough to hand over the keys.

The second point I made was that there was no need for such data until at least the stage where the prospective tenant has viewed and declared that they actually want the property.

I conceded nothing

Fair enough. I was simply comparing your points to my situation where the agency were asking every applicant to provide this data before they had seen the property. Fwiw, it seems like we actually agree (concessions or otherwise).

the_syco

gizmo81 wrote: »

Personally, I don't think we need more private landlords in fact we need less and better quality. As posters said it's not their problem to solve the homeless crisis

We need state controlled houses for people on SW.

aloooof wrote: »

A tenant. But not every applicant before they've even viewed the place

I'm guessing that this prevents the landlord wasting his time showing the house to people that are unable to show proof of funds.

Over here in Toronto, most landlords of decent properties (and even a few sh|tty ones) want you to send them your credit check that you've done yourself before they even consider you.

aloooof

davo10 wrote: »

Op you might consider it beyond reasonable, but a LL may argue that it is reasonable to ensure that the tenant is capable of paying the rent. To me, it's a complete waste of time asking for bank statements and I wouldn't do it, but then other LL would not ask for the equivalent of 3 month's rent up front. I've been told a good few times that it is unreasonable to ask for this, but at the same time my properties have never been empty. Every LL wants to try and minimise risk, there is no definitive way to do this as the more you try, the more unreasonable tenants think it is. What is difinitive though, is the fact that errant tenants are a huge problem for property owners.

From the previously mentioned report, it seems as though the Data Protection Commissioner also deems it beyond reasonable, so surely that trumps whatever LL's may argue.

Ultimately, I understand that LL's want to minimise risk, and needless to say, that's completely fair on their part. I would be relatively happy to provide redacted Bank Statements once offerered the tenancy in order to secure it, as another poster suggested. But to have to provide Bank Statements and (especially) Payslips to attain a viewing is beyond excessive.

davo10

"Seems as though" is not the same as "prohibits the practice of". Maybe they have a difinitive wording on this which prohibits the practice of requesting bank statements or, they may just be giving an opinion. Perhaps the EA may just have to show they are in compliance with data controller requirements. Either way, if the LL requires it and you won't provide it, you won't get the property.

Dravokivich

davo10 wrote: »

"Seems as though" is not the same as "prohibits the practice of". Maybe they have a difinitive wording on this which prohibits the practice of requesting bank statements or, they may just be giving an opinion. Perhaps the EA may just have to show they are in compliance with data controller requirements. Either way, if the LL requires it and you won't provide it, you won't get the property.

Sometimes it feels as if Landlords / Lettings agencies forget they are providing a service to a customer...

aloooof

davo10 wrote: »

"Seems as though" is not the same as "prohibits the practice of". Maybe they have a difinitive wording on this which prohibits the practice of requesting bank statements or, they may just be giving an opinion. Perhaps the EA may just have to show they are in compliance with data controller requirements. Either way, if the LL requires it and you won't provide it, you won't get the property.

Looks as though you're correct, judging by this sentence from the report:

We told the letting agency that we could not see any basis for collecting bank details, PPS numbers or copies of utility bills at application or property-viewing stage and we urged it to cease the practice immediately.

So that would suggest they don't / can't enforce it. Having said that, I have heard that new EU regulations regarding data protection are coming down the line (GDPR I believe it's called) that could carry severe fines, so, personally, I hope that would encourage agencies to change this policy.

Samuel T. Cogley

Dravokivich wrote: »

Sometimes it feels as if Landlords / Lettings agencies forget they are providing a service to a customer...

Ultimately, like shop lifting and insurance fraud, who do you think is ultimately paying for delinquent tenants?