UK Landlord Forum / Life

I had a credit check on me before I moved in-it wasnt great but it was good enough. Now all of a sudden, 3 years later, the letting agent is INSISTING I give permission for a NEW credit check/reference to be done on me, allegedly because the landlord needs it "for building insurance". I have never heard of this in my life, and didnt have this come up in 20 years of renting at a previous property.

However, I have strong reason to suspect they are trying to illegally evict me, and looking for any justification, simply because I have made multiple complaints about the poor upkeep of the building and how they have regularly been in breach of agreements. Can someone please tell me if it is "normal" or common practise or even legal to require FURTHER credit checks and references of a tenant, years into renting, even though no new contract has recently been signed??!

Thanks.

If your landlord simply wanted to evict you he could issue s21.I think however that a lot of landlords will be taking pre-emptive action in case 21 is abolished as expected. If your credit rating was borderline before,they may want to check that it has not gone down further,in order to assess the future risk. It sounds as if you might be happier moving out anyway if the place is really bad? I don't think they are acting illegally in requesting this check.

No, I wouldn't say that was common practice. As a landlord, I'd consider three years of the rent being paid on time as better evidence than anything a snapshot credit score might tell me. It's certainly an odd thing to want for building insurance. I suppose they might be applying for some sort of rent guarantee insurance, but that's seldom much cop anyway.

On the other hand, I don't really see how it would help them to evict you, if that were their intention. Failing a credit check isn't grounds for eviction. Refusing a credit check isn't grounds for eviction (or, at any rate, it's not going to wash in court). If, for whatever reason, they're unable to serve a valid Section 21 notice, they're pretty much out of legal options as long as you keep paying the rent.

They can always ASK. They cannot make you.

The reason given is, believable, if it were for rent guarantee insurance. Those I've looked at have required tenants to pass the affordability checks set by the insurer. Landlord can't just take checks down previously to qualify.

"For building insurance", no.

The purported reasoning doesn't matter. The potential outcome of it doesn't matter (as you've been advised). They can't evict you using the results (and certainly can't illegally evict you using the results). So let them (that side) spend their money on doing another check. Then see if anything comes out of it. If so, tell us what it is. My belief is that nothing will come out of it. And, as they are insisting, just go with the flow for an easy life. Why expend the effort making yourself the 'difficult Tenant', objecting and refusing, if you are [now] sure nothing bad can come of it?