All Forum Posts by: Malachi P.

I do not think your questions are out of line. But I can also see why people would not want to provide some of this material facts before seeing the property, you are putting them on the defensive. I think a slight adjustment might better suit this goal. When some one inquires about the the ADU, maybe try sending this form and giving them a showing window. Let's say Saturday Jan 14 you will being doing showing, "to lock in a time to view the property please fill out and send back with your available times and I will provide you with a 30 min slot".

Maybe this approach will change their mind set about filling out the form. They are not being told "no" before viewing, it just becomes their ticket to a time. 

Name/ Phone Number & Email

Desired Move in Date?
Desired lease term? 6 or 12 Month or other,  please specify 

I would also maybe reduce the number of questions.  I would change most questions to statements.  For instance I would state that a bankruptcy may not disqualify you, but a credit and background checks and a min score of 620 is required.

and/or

A income verification will be done and minimum income requirement of 3x times rent is required.

and/or

This is a smoke free property.

and/or

We allow 2 pet on a case by case.

and/or

For additional consideration please free feel to tell us about yourself or anyone else in your family that will be staying on the property.

Sometime the approach is as important as the question.  Good Luck!

My experience is pre-screening questionnaires work where most LL require them and do not work where very few LL require them.  We do not require a pre-screen questionnaire because they are rate in our market.

We do not do individual showings.  We have an open house.  We send a reminder to each interested party about the open house an hour or two before the open house.  The open house creates a perceived frenzy that encourages immediate applications.  We virtually always get a qualified application in our first open house.  I will say that we are in a very low vacancy market where there are more tenants than available housing.  

During Covid we had to do individual showings.  

Our open house gets nearly everyone stating they will submit an application, but if they do not submit it immediately, I would estimate it is maybe 1 of 5 applicants get submitted.  Fortunately, about 25% submit applications immediately.  Our open houses are usually scheduled for 1.5 hours but we usually end up staying 2 hours.  We virtually always get a qualified applicant from the first open house.  Note to get a qualified applicant often requires more than applicant.  Even with charging for applying, we still have around 50% of applicants not meet out qualification standards.  Fortunately, we typically end up with 2 to 5 applications at the open house.

During the 1 on 1 showings during Covid, nearly everyone that showed up for their scheduled showing stated they would fill out an application.  About 1 in 10 filled out the application immediately.  Of those that did not submit application immediately, there was maybe 1 in 10 submitted an application later.  We confirmed with each potential applicant an hour or two before the showing and still had a high rate of no-show (maybe 30%).  It is incredible how many of the people who missed their appointment still desired to be re-scheduled for a showing.  We do not re-schedule as someone that does not make their appointment is not someone that we desire as a tenant.  I would estimate that we had 30 thirty minute scheduled showings (about 20 actual showings) to get a single qualified applicant (~50% of applicants qualify).  This amounts to 30 showings (20 who show up), 15 hours of scheduled showings (10 hours with tenant showing up), 2 applications received, one qualified application.  It is very inefficient compared to having an open house.  Without the perceived frenzy, we have a significantly lower rate of applications received.

It is critical to charge for application.  This reduces unqualified applicants.  It also reduces bogus ESA applicants if combined with an ESA policy.  Applicants do not want to spend $35 to find out that their application is rejected because they do not have a legitimate ESA.

Good luck