Classic story, we ended up as landlords due to negative equity. That is fine, but something DH and I agreed on is to try and do this as ethically as reasonably possible. The flat is pet-friendly, we're happy to consider DSS, willing to figure something out in case of furlough etc. We would happily rent to a single parent - which apparently is above the baseline, which should really be higher.
We currently have three applicants. Number 1 and 2 (chronologically!) would be perfectly fine. Both reliable-ish employment, no partner, no children, no pets (flat explicitly advertised as pet-friendly). Applicant number 3: couple with a 3-year old and a dog, on DSS.
The flat is furnished with a bed-sofa in the living room, so in theory, they'd be able to manage. However, isn't this way too small for a family of three? I also worry that their willingness to consider a one-bedroom for a family of three might point towards payment issues (flats only slightly further away would be bigger+cheaper). If she were a single parent with a child I would happily rent to her but for a couple with a child it would be very cosy.
I don't know. We are still awaiting references from applicant 1 and 2 - number 1, I really like and have a good gut feeling about. However, I would also hate to be the kind of person who doesn't rent to someone just because their circumstances arent't picture-perfect. Would this be big enough for a family of three? The flat is close to the beach and has a garden, so other than the number of rooms, I can see why they'd be interested. Ideally, we would like for the next person to rent long-term and I can't see a kid being happy without their own room once they start school. Then again, there is a school across the road from the flat.
YABU = That is big enough
YANBU = Way to small
(and yes, of course I name-changed, have you seen how some people treat landlords on here?!)