Visible vs Non Visible Tattoos on Tenant Applicants

[Mark B.]

Good morning all!

I do want to preface this with - I did search the forum briefly for a direct answer and found none. So if there is a thread about this, please let me know!

I was reading a few things about people rejecting tenant applicants with tattoo's.  Of course the discussion went into types of tattoo's (gang, artsy, sentimental). But I'm wondering how people define visible vs. non visible. And also if there are actual rules that can be defined from location and style.

I'm also assuming the differentiation between men and women matters too.  So where do people draw the lines of visible? For men, I personally consider a visible tattoo to be any tattoo that shows when a person is wearing a t shirt and jeans.  But then for a woman, I know that neck lines are usually lower, so even the collarbone area could be considered visible. 

Following up on that, in order to protect yourself, would you have to state clear guidelines? Assume I wanted only tenants without visible tattoos (no neck, face, hands), would I have to almost put a chart in the lease? 

I do want to say that I'm not against most tattoo's, and I try not to judge on tattoo's, but if a tenant has "MOM" tattoo'ed on his forehead... I'm assuming he may not be the best candidate.

Any and all thoughts would be greatly appreciated!!

[Robert Melcher]

@Elizabeth Colegrove exactly correct.  I've met with rough looking applicants covered in tattoos and they turned out to be the best tenants.  They swing the 3X rent on the rental and come up clean in the background, who am I to judge?