To think this is shit way of letting out a flat

[HeadsDownThumbsUp]

A friend of mine and her DP are having a difficult time finding accommodation. They relocated here recently and their short-term lease - which was supposed to tide them over until they found an appropriate rental property - is coming to an end.

Yesterday they went to view a flat which was perfect for them in every way, and easily affordable. Normal procedure would normally be to have the tenant put down a holding deposit (first come, first served) and then, pending checks and references, sign the lease. This letting agent demanded that all couples write an email explaining their circumstances and basically beg for the flat. The selected tenants then have the privilege of paying a holding deposit. She wrote an effusive email which outlined their employment situation and so on. I can't think of anything which would adversely affect their 'application' but they weren't chosen, and she's very disappointed.

Is this just me, or is this a mental way to let out a flat. It's a rental property. Surely, if you have an adequate income and can pass basic credit checks etc then you should be entitled to put down a holding deposit and enter into a lease agreement. It doesn't seem fair or transparent. Though it's a peripheral concern, it also seems to invite corruption. I can understand a private landlord letting to a preferred couple - but a letting agency? Surely their procedures should be more professional.

With so more and more people relying on private rented accommodation surely this sort of practise shouldn't really be acceptable.

Thoughts?

Is the agent Australian? Because that's the norm here, especially in the major cities. Often they are trying to see who will bid up the rental price. Then again, as a landlord, I wouldn't necessarily give the flat to the first person who came long and could afford it. Especially if there were lots of others who were interested ... Then I could see where a statement of interest by potential tenants would be useful.

When we rent out our place we are quite picky about who we let it to.

We don't go to those lengths but we try out best to work out which of our potential tenants are most likely to be the least hassle. We set the rent relatively low in order to get enough interest.

We don't have a particular blueprint for what makes a good tenant- so whether or not someone has a child, is a student, single/couple or in a particular job isn't necessarily what tips it.

We do this because we've had bad tenants in the past and the up front hassle for us, combined with the loss of a bit of rent, more than offsets the damage/costs a bad tenant can cause for us.

Yes, this might be a bit inconvenient for potential tenants but that's the consequence of having some bad eggs who've trashed the place in the past. They cost us weeks of work and thousands in repairs, so unfortunately everyone else pays with a bit more hassle.

We hope that the benefit of living in a nice house for a reasonable rent with landlords who leave them alone and do repairs and the necessary checks so as to cause minimum inconvenience to them makes up for it.

Our worse tenants had perfect references, good employment records and looked great on paper. There is always an element of risk involved with letting a property.

We could never have predicted that one of our tenants would attempt to stab the other one to death or that social services would bash the door down to rescue their little boy. The tenant in question ended up being sent to jail for her behaviour and stopped paying rent. She refused to sign the form to release the property so we had to take them court.

All our other tenants have been good, even the one who found herself a single mother with no income. Good communication is important and greedy landlords who do no maintaince find themselves without tenants.

I wish that there was a karma that bad landlords, bad agencies and bad tenants could all meet.

I rent a place which I got simply by being the first with the holding deposit, but the agents which rent out the house I own elsewhere vet the people and give me a little life history for them (which actually makes me feel a bit uncomfortable - knowing so much about someone else's financial/family circumstances) and advises me on which tenant they think I should go for should they all apply. To their credit, I've always had good tenants so they must be doing something right.

I get that a landlord should have some kind of veto on tenants (it's their property they are risking after all), but I also think that an element of first-come, first-served needs to be there.