To think letting agents have no right to go through my bank statements?

[oversomeniagara]

We're trying to move flat and the letting agent has demanded three months' worth of bank statements on top of the usual credit checks, employer and landlord references.

I think this is really unnecessary and intrusive and I hate the idea of strangers combing through my accounts. I sent the bank statements with everything but salary, utilities bills and rent blocked out and now they are saying they have to see the full statements to check that we aren't 'living in an overdraft'. I am I right in thinking this is none of their business so long as the rent and bills are paid?

The flat is actually £500 pcm cheaper than our current house (we live in London...) so that combined with our excellent references and credit ratings should surely be enough! I am really outraged and disgusted by this whole process!!

Vivienne, I keep saying this, but bank statements are not a reliable indicator of whether or not someone can afford the rent.

I wasn't aware that letting agents had the financial training and knowledge to be able to judge whether or not someone could afford the rent.

Alan, quite.

Well they are a reliable indicator of how much money is coming in and how much is going out. I can completely see why the OP thinks this is intrusive. They just won't get the tenancy if they don't show the bank statements. I'd go to a different agency where they don't make these demands.

they are a reliable indicator of how much money is coming in and how much is going out

Of that particular account, sure. But a) at least one person has pointed out that it's easy enough to have more than one account and to show the most favourable one and b) the amount of money going in and out could easily change drastically at any point. They're pretty meaningless in that sense.

I'd go to a different agency where they don't make these demands.
Well I can't disagree with that. Unfortunately, also as others have said, it's not always easy when you need to move out of or into a rented place fast. Sadly, some EAs have people over a barrel.

I wasn't meaning to be unhelpful but I've spent time banging my head against 'rules' not this particular one but it rarely works. I agree the agency has the upper hand in this case.

When I applied for a mortgage I was required to provide bank statements.

So I do think YABU.

In many cases, you will effectively paying your landlords mortgage.

Would you question your mortgage provider or refuse to provide similar paperwork to them?

I think its responsible to require your tenants to show bank statements, not because you are being nosy, but to confirm that they are spending money wisely. If you redact stuff you do see the ins and outs but you'd have no way of knowing if they were for loans which had massive amounts of interest, or whether you had temporarily shifted money from one account to another for the purposes of making your finances look better.

You should have an honest and open financial relationship with the person who you are renting from because they are effectively investing in you. Your finances could have a significant impact on theirs.

to confirm that they are spending money wisely.

These are the kind of sanctimonious comments that I'm finding the most offensive. Why do people think it's OK for LLs to pass judgement on how, above and beyond covering the rent, tenants are spending their money?

'effectively paying [their] landlords mortgage' and if a landlord is 'effectively investing in' is not a tenant's concern or responsibility. If a landlord has decided to make money in this way it is their responsibility.

It's making me wonder if it would be fair game then too, for tenants to request the right to see the financial in ands outs of landlords - especially to see if they are in a position/have track history to pay up on any maintenance issues, buildings insurance, mortgage payments etc.

And you do realise that every single person who works at your bank can bring up your statement at any time and have a gawp if they were so inclined?

Not if they want to keep their job. Most bank computer systems will track individual access to account details, and if you don't have the authority it can cost you your job to look at other people's accounts.

But back to the thread.

A bank account is not reliable in any way to judge whether someone can afford something or not.

You can have more than one account.

EAs and landlords do not generally have the financial training to make sense of accounts.

And the short period of time they ask for, eg 3-6 months, doesn't give any sense of how the account really operates.

These are all comments and thoughts put forward by others, and I totally agree. I have a financial background.

Credit checks cover a longer period of time and can flag up stuff that a bank account simply wouldn't show. References from previous landlords are also a more reliable indicator.

And things can change so quickly. I know someone who lost a job and up to that point everything had been paid on time, but afterwards it was a different story. No way could a landlord have been able to see this happening from a bank account.

And my own bank gave me an overdraft I've never actually used, or even asked for, so having an overdraft facility doesn't indicate any either.

Whistling, very good point.

do people think it's OK for LLs to pass judgement on how, above and beyond covering the rent, tenants are spending their money?

Why? Because, despite the apparently firm and one sided truth here, i.e. all LLs are money grabbing entitled bastards and their EAs are worse, the truth is that they are handing over to you their most expensive asset and they are protecting themselves from the kind of tenants that make such rules and intrusions necessary!

Real World calling.... it isn't all about you! Sometimes other people have real life needs too!

ignoring the shrieking (is there the same objection when applying for a mortgage?) one post here rang the alarm: Request to insure the landlord's contents.

you can't insure what you don't own. You should have tenants' insurance for YOUR stuff, and it is wise also to have accidental damage cover to protect your deposit if you, er, accidentally damage something. But beyond that - no.

unenforceable contract term. You can't comply with it.

the apparently firm and one sided truth here, i.e. all LLs are money grabbing entitled bastards and their EAs are worse

Can you find us some posts that illustrate/prove this claim, Nomama?

that they are handing over to you their most expensive asset
Referencing, credit checks and insurance all exist to protect this asset. Plus, a landlord has generally speaking BY CHOICE decided to make money from/invest in property; most people know what the potential problems of being a landlord are before going into it and they have to take some responsibility for it.

I don't understand what you mean about the 'Real World'. Are those of us who've quite happily rented and been good tenants without having our bank statements scrutinised not living in the real world? How about the PP with a background in finance? Does she/he not live in the real world?

Lastly, I find your excessive exclamation marks aggressive and comments such as 'It isn't all about you!' also aggressive, and needlessly rude.

Nobody checks tenants bank statements "to see if they are spending money wisely", the obvious things they would be looking out for would be unpaid direct debits or standing orders on the account.

The credit referencing is carried out by the letting agents & it would not be the LL requesting to see the bank statements.

I am a LL & I have used various agents over years, some forward all the information to me & some just advise that the tenants have passed the checks. I am not fussed either way.

A lot of property rented out is worth well over £100k, surely no one would be expected to be handed the keys without financial checks being carried out

What would surprise most of you is how cheap it is to credit reference an individual, a full tenant check costs £29.50 through the NLA. So most letting agents are over charging, even taking into account their costs.

surely no one would be expected to be handed the keys without financial checks being carried out

No. But what people are suggesting is that credit checks are adequate and less intrusive than looking through bank statements.

I've said this till I'm blue in the face, but arguments about how much rental properties might worth/it might be the LL's main income/major asset etc don't cut much ice with me; I simply don't believe that people go into renting out properties without knowing what the potential risks are, and I maintain that as with any investment, the investor needs to assume responsibly for it. It doesn't give LLs (or agents, and I know that it's the agents rather than the actual LL personally that usually carries out checks) the right to know all the financial ins and outs of potential tenants.

Yes! I am indeed very rude *OnlyLovers!

My posting style is rude, the content is rude and I am obviously on a different planet!

The one sided understanding of LLs is blatantly obvious, this thread and many other just like it. A disinterested read will confirm that.

LLs come in many shapes and sizes, personally and financially. I wouldn't make any sweeping statement about why anyone is a LL, so generally speaking I can't agree with your view of them.

As for my Real World comments, the world that exists beyond an individual's nose. A wider view, less self centred. As I said, sometimes inequities are not personal, not about an individual at all. Sometime things just are unfair to some, whilst being eminently fair and sensible for other!

Much as you see me as rude and aggressive I am responding to what I read as your own passive aggressiveness. We may both be wrong... who knows, this is only a forum and we all know the written word can be a treacherous thing.

I simply don't believe that people go into renting out properties without knowing what the potential risks are, and I maintain that as with any investment, the investor needs to assume responsibly for it.

Indeed! And all sorts of financial checks and measures may form part of this.

Truly, it cuts no ice with me that some find it intrusive for a LL or EA to try to find out as much as possible prior to renting out their personal/clients property.

I simply don't believe that people go into renting out properties without knowing what the potential risks are, and I maintain that as with any investment, the investor needs to assume responsibly for it.

I know a couple of friends who owned properties when they met. They moved in together in a new area as one of them got a new job. They were unable to sell due to the reduction in value of their properties at the time. So they rented out. It more or less covered the mortgage but was a massive hassle. They sold as soon as they were both able.

They currently rent now. They were kicked out of their last property at short notice.

So when they moved to their current place whilst they save for a family home, they were happy and understood the need of their landlord to want reliable, stable, long term tenants.

I don't think they ever intended to rent when they bought, they invested in their tenants because of a massive change in their lifestyle, and they very much understood why their landlord was very particular about their tenant and wanted to know more about them, than simply whether they paid the rent every month.

A disinterested read doesn't help me, Nomama, with understanding where you get your assertion about a 'one sided understanding of LLs' from. Some quotes from other posts would.

I'd argue though that many posters have demonstrated that they/we DO understand the LL's point of view. I don't think anyone has said that they don't think any kind of checks should carried out before a LL rents out a property; it's just the nature of those checks that people are discussing.

I do not have a general view of landlords and I am aware that they come in many shapes and sizes. I am confident though that the few things I've said here about LLs as a group – that an asset/investment is something they shouldn't go into without taking responsibility;that they cannot see into the future; and that they are not generally experts at financial forecasting – are, generally speaking, true enough and not problematic sweeping statements.

Real world: well, I'd ask again, how about the PP with a background in finance, who happens not to agree with you? Does she/he not live in the real world?

And as for inequities, as far as I can see, there need not be any inequity in the landlord/tenant relationship. A reasonable amount of financial surety for a landlord's benefit can be obtained by credit checks and good references, with insurance as a back-up. In return for this a tenant need not have their bank statements pored over. That seems to me to be very fair to both sides.

I can't comment on what you see as my passive-aggressiveness as I have to confess that it's a word/concept that I read and hear about all the time but don't really understand the meaning of.

When I applied for a mortgage I was required to provide bank statements.
You mean that when you applied for (probably) 3 - 5x your annual income in order to buy a property where vast repayments must be made each month you were required to show your spending habits.

it's a bit different from starting a six month rental agreement at around 1/10th your salary (and with a months rent and 1.5x deposit having actually paid for nearly half of it upfront anyway!).

you can't insure what you don't own. You should have tenants' insurance for YOUR stuff, and it is wise also to have accidental damage cover to protect your deposit if you, er, accidentally damage something. But beyond that - no.
True, but by the same token...
As a tenant I can't insure the building, I can't guarantee that it's free from defects, I don't undertake a structural survey, etc. but I'd want to know that should the building collapse or become uninhabitable (through no fault of mine) that I wouldn't suddenly be left with nowhere to live, either homeless or with a huge hotel bill.
Why should a tenant not demand to see a landlord bank statement so that they can be satisfied that buildings insurance is paid?
Maybe tenants should also demand to see the mortgage agreement to ensure that the LL is allowed to rent the property. -because through no fault of their own they could be evicted from the property and left with nothing and no recourse also.

If you are a landlord would you be happy to show me that you have buildings insurance, So that I could understand what cover I was entitled to on that policy?
Would you be happy to show me your mortgage agreements so I can see that you have permission from the actual property owner (the bank) to rent it out).
Would you be happy to show me your bank statements so that I can see that you pay your mortgage, and not spend the money down at Betfred?

Sally, I guess at the end of the day, the agent has the "right" to ask, and you have the "right" to refuse.

Subsequently, they have the "right" not to let you the property.

I hope it works out in your favour.

LL and LA can only do a very basic credit check - they can't see your loans or credit cards as they don't have that kind of access. All they can check is whether the potential tenant has been bankrupt or has a CCJ. So when they add your rental payments to your credit file they will be able to show how reliable you are in paying your rent.

I am with OP in that surely the summary of money in and money out is enough, line item is really no-ones business. Besides I would far rather call the previous landlord for a reference then rely and focus on how much money and what they spend it on (that is if there is a previous landlord).

When I was buying my place, the estate agent wanted proof of my deposit amount because in her words the sellers 'did not believe I had xxxk in my bank for the despoit' she wanted to see the bank statement in detail. I refused and said I am happy to place my deposit money with my appointed lawyer who can write and confirm the money is available and waiting - what better confirmation can you get! She still insisted but I just went ahead with what I said I would do and once the lawyer contacted the estate agent she backed down.

I am not about to reveal that I had more money available so she can then go back to the seller and advise them that I can pay even more. ( I couldn't by the way the rest of the money I had was for fees and furniture).

Cheeky lady even had the gall to my face she thought my money was obtained fradulently because how could I put so much money together by the age of 29 and I just told her straight - years of living at home, no holidays and spending as little as possible, plus all the commission I earned working in an estate agent went a long way to helping.

To be honest anyone now c ould open a bank account pay their salary into in to pay rent and bills and then just withdraw in cash XX amount and spend it on what they want/ pay of loans etc. What would a landlord do then....how would that tell them anything

I just told her straight – years of living at home, no holidays and spending as little as possible, plus all the commission I earned working in an estate agent.

I'd have told her straight that it was none of her earthly business, personally!