I own a couple of rental units. When potential renters apply I have a credit check run on them. If they have a history of not paying their rent, I won't rent to them. I don't run a welfare office, I'm in it for the money. Not based on race, it's based on the ability/willingness to pay on time and meet their contractual promise to me.
Yes, but anyone that wants to give you grief only has to show the "disparate impact" on "people of color" to "prove" you're a "racist".
I think it is reasonable to get a credit check on anyone that is supposed to pay you for something, over time.
I have a real problem with the concept of credit checks to get employment. As a contractor, I've been subjected to three in two years. It disgusts me. And the excuse is that they fear a person with "bad" credit is a security risk - except I hold the keys to no more secure data than pretty much anybody else here. It is really just a ruse.
But with the ramping up real estate crash, there are going to be so many highly qualified potential employees with "bad" credit that the companies will have to ignore the credit check except for the most dire cases.
You're fully justified. Deadbeat tentants and those who break leases have bad credit.
But for homeowners and auto insurance policies? Show me the correlation between storm damage and credit rating, or collision damage and credit rating.
Employers are using credit checks as character checks, underwriters are using credit checks as a pretext to gouge low income people.
This is different, Harvard was not rent to her but to pay her. More sense would be be if she run credit check on Harvard :)
I've been a landlord in both Los Angeles and Seattle, and have yet to have a prospective tenent with decent credit. If I waited for a good credit report person I would never rent anything. Fortunately, I have somehow managed to identify the trustworthy ones and haven't been burned yet (knock on wood).