Estate Agent Refusing to allow us to view a property

suetonius

Wanted to view a property for rent in a very affluent area. 

Asked lots of questions and told that as we couldn't prove an income of x30 the rent, then we wouldn't be allowed to view it. I explained that we have sufficient savings to cover the rent, even to pay fully in advance if necessary. Next excuse was that the landlord wanted a working professional. We are professionals but are taking a year off work, but she insisted that they wanted someone currently working. If it helps, one is a lawyer and the other a banker.

The estate agent won't even let us view it, as she insists there are over twenty other more suitable candidates for the flat. 

Is there any way around this? My money is just as good as theirs. I could even provide references from work etc. 

Mickey666

Sounds like you are at least 20th in the queue and don't meet the profile that the landlord is looking for anyway.
Viewing the property sounds like a waste of time so why bother?  Surely it would be a better use of your time to look for another property?

moneysavinghero

At the end of the day it's up to the LL who they want in their property. They have chosen someone else. You could try viewing properties at the grottier end of the market as these may be more relaxed, but i doubt those are what you are looking for (the LL of those properties will probably be thinking whats wrong with my house why cant i make them rent my house, how can i get around this).

suetonius

I understand that, but it is uncomfortable to be discriminated against by someone who has no idea about us. The characteristics required by the LL don't really mean that the chosen tenant will be any more upstanding than we would be. 

moneysavinghero

Is this the same property that you are trying to reduce the price of on your other thread?

fred246

I think if I was a landlord I would want people who were engaged in more honest professions to rent my property.

k3lvc

suetonius said:

I understand that, but it is uncomfortable to be discriminated against by someone who has no idea about us. The characteristics required by the LL don't really mean that the chosen tenant will be any more upstanding than we would be. 

That's a serious chip you're carrying - how does their requirements suddenly turn to 'discrimination' ?

Thrugelmir

The LL may have previous experience of tenants paying up front then defaulting. Hence the preference for people actively employed. Not least at the current time in the midst's of a pandemic. If there's considerable interest one way of filtering applicants down. 

MaryNB

I'm not in the least bit surprised. I've always had to show proof of income and provide contact details for an employer. Not before a viewing but definitely before signing the agreement. Perhaps they're doing it upfront to avoid having to do lots of viewings during Covid.

Even if you offer to pay in full what happens if you decide to stay longer than initially intended? What happens if you need to stay longer than your savings allow for? That's probably what they are wary of. They can't evict you as soon as you run out of funds, there will be a long drawn out process. Also, they have no way of knowing how easy it will be for you to get back into employment.  If they can get a tenant who has proof they are currently working they'll go with that. 

AdrianC

One flat.
Twenty+ viewers.

Really, what makes you so much more special than the others? The line has to be drawn somewhere. And "sufficient current income" is as good a place as any.

It's perfectly legal for them to "discriminate" against you on that basis. The only bases that are not legal are the protected characteristics enshrined in the Equality Act 2010.

But, of course, given that one of you is a lawyer, you will be utterly familiar with that.

Mickey666

suetonius said:

I understand that, but it is uncomfortable to be discriminated against by someone who has no idea about us. The characteristics required by the LL don't really mean that the chosen tenant will be any more upstanding than we would be. 

They know you're at least 20th in the queue so what are the chances that the 19+ people in front of you are all going to drop out.  This is not discrimination it's just sensibly avoiding a waste of your time, the agent's time and perhaps disturbing an existing tenant when there is simply no need.

No doubt the agent will get back to you if the 19+ people ahead of you in the queue all drop out . . . or are you seriously suggesting they should discriminate against those ahead of you by letting you let you jump the queue?