NEVER Completely Rely On Tenant Guarantors

Tenant Guarantors

9 times out of 10 I won’t reply to emails that I receive via my contact form, not out of spite, but more likely because they don’t pass my rigorous (but fair) email screening protocol, which I have documented in detail on my about page. So if you’ve been waiting patiently for a reply to an email, you may want to have a gander over my screening process so you can identify why I may have left you out in the cold.

However, on rare occasions, I’ll receive a polite email from someone so hopelessly naïve and pitiful (in a cute squidgy way, like an overweight Bulldog that can barely walk), that I wouldn’t have been able to live with myself if I didn’t respond, despite having failed to pass the screening…

The tale of Shit tenants’ with Qualified Guarantors

The email:


I’m hoping you can help me.

I’m a first time landlord who’s just above to rent out a property Kent.

I’ve found a couple who would like to rent my flat, however they are young 20-somethings. I will be charging £XXXX in rent. They have not passed credit checks however their guarantors (their mothers) have.

One guarantor makes XX,000 and the other XX,000, so they can cover the rent if the tenants default.

However, I’m still unsure about renting the flat out to a couple who (according to their income) cannot afford the rent.

I’m receiving mixed advice from people who have said “but their guarantors can cover the rent if they default so you are protected.” – how true is this? And how complicated is it to go after the guarantor if they do default?

I’m confused please help!

Thank you

Disclaimer: I’ve slightly modified the details to protect the Bulldog’s identity.

I genuinely hope the amount of people that are confused by the same issue, or a relatively similar one, are as rare as Northern hairy-nosed wombats (one of the rarest land mammals in the world according to Wikipedia. Who knew?). But the sad reality is, it’s probably more common than we’d like to believe, and that’s why I’m doing my part to step on this fire!

Seasoned landlords will probably read the dilemma and produce a condescending chuckle. I may have initially reacted that way, because…

The obvious answer is: do NOT touch them with a 10ft pole. You’d have to be insane to contemplate those terms, let alone agree to them.

On the surface the answer may seem blatantly obvious. But when you put the situation into context (which I did after further correspondence), it’s actually understandable why the poor schmuck was so confused.

She’s a new and inexperienced landlord, so she opted to get help from the professionals, a letting agent. Ironically, it was her grease-ball agent that was trying to convince her that the tenants were suitable and safe as houses (sorry, I just couldn’t go through with it).

When you’re rightfully looking for guidance from the experts, and they defy all logic with their bullshit advice, you naturally do question (or completely ignore) your own better judgement, despite how irrational the advice may seem. We put our trusts in the experts, and why wouldn’t we?

Imperfect Tenant

Needless to say, I quickly intervened and rammed her off the fiery road to hell by giving her my humble recommendation: to reject those tenants quicker than your mother can unbutton her overalls.

ALWAYS Find “suitable” tenants, never settle for slop

If you’re in a similar dilemma, my advice and points of consideration are the following (I briefly gave her the same advice):

  • Always get qualified tenants
    There is NO substitute for a qualified tenant.

    As tempting as it can be to frantically scrap together a compelling list of arguments to accept an unconvincing prospective tenant, you should realise that what you’re fundamentally doing is trying to polish a turd. If your tenant(s) doesn’t have an income that can sustain the rent payments (whether it by salary and/or housing benefits), or falls short in some other glaringly obvious (or even subtle) ways, they undoubtedly shouldn’t make the shortlist, let alone progress for further interrogation. Don’t force yourself or allow yourself to get forced by an agent into seeing something that isn’t there. Save that for women and alcohol.

    That means you should not only eliminate qualified guarantors from being a substitute for qualified tenants, but also Rent Guarantee Insurance (RGI), tenants that are prepared to pay big deposits, have good references and credit rating.

    A good tenant will have or qualify for ALL of the above (apart from the big deposit, it’s not necessary) and have an income that can comfortably cover the rent. Don’t settle; don’t get allured by a sparkling turd. Say it out loud, “I am not a magpie.”

  • Guarantors are NOT reliable
    This is the thing about Guarantors – most of them are woeful idiots. I’m sorry, but it’s soooo bloody true.

    From my experience, most guarantors fall into one of the two following categories:

    • They only agreed to endorse their son because they wholeheartedly believe that sweet little Tommy will NEVER default on rent. He’s far too responsible. He’s a good boy.

      They have ZERO intention of actually fulfilling their legal obligation if it comes down to it, because as far as they’re concerned it’s not even a possibility. They’re blinded by that fickle thing called love.

      What Doris doesn’t realise is that Tommy is robbing her purse dry every time she’s clearing out her bowels.

    • As I’ve discussed before, there genuinely is no incentive or reward for anyone to be a guarantor– those that sign on the dotted line largely have NO idea what they’re signing up for.

      Most Guarantors are so engrossed by the actual ‘act’ of helping someone acquire a home (whether it be out of love or hate), that they don’t even pay attention to the legal ramifications of being a guarantor. They don’t even take the time to understand, they just think, “Oh, I only have to sign a piece of paper to help Tommy move into his new house. Wonderful”

      Sure, it’s cute and totally selfless, but equally as mind-numbingly stupid.

    I’m not saying guarantors are bad/stupid people, but I am saying many are oblivious to what they actually are.

    In either case, the result is often a shameless family feud, which the landlord inevitably gets caught in the middle of. The guarantor often becomes reluctant to pay, because “it’s not fair I have to pay for Tommy’s rent”

    What’s remarkable is that these uppity shit-for-brains genuinely believe it’s unfair that landlords make them accountable for the legal responsibility they signed up for. So now the landlord has to decide, take the tenant or guarantor to court for the arrears? It’s the same freaking process either way.

    I’m not saying you shouldn’t bother with a guarantor; I’m not saying they’re absolutely useless. You should 100% have a guarantor in place for every tenancy. I’m just saying they shouldn’t be relied upon as a guaranteed safety net- they should account for one of several nets.

  • Gut instinct
    If something doesn’t seem right about a tenancy situation, pay attention to what your rumbling gut is bellowing- it often makes more sense than any other referencing technique.

    I rank ‘gut instincts’ as one of the best referencing methods available, and ironically, it’s the one tool most letting agents are, by design, unequipped with (or just plain ignore).

    Most agents will NEVER want the best for your property, because they only see the numbers, which means they rarely consider whether the prospective tenant is ‘practically’ suitable. An agent will tend to vet your tenant on paper, while a good landlord (and exceptionally good agents, which are far and few between) is more likely to vet the tenant on paper and in pragmatic terms (i.e. by judging the tenant’s characteristics and mannerisms).

    That’s why I always take the viewings myself and only use online letting agents to generate the enquiries. Gut instinct is a killer weapon, one which I dare not go into the wild without!

  • Reject pressure
    I’ve been pressured into buying shit before. We all have, whether we realise it or not.

    Actually, let me give you a recent example of how weak and pathetic I am.

    Last week I took my car in for a service at a franchised car dealership. Firstly, we all know how bloody extortionate they are compared to Uncle Bob’s MOT Service, and secondly, how they try to up-sell every piece of junk on the menu. But of course, we all want the ‘service history’ from a franchised dealership to curb depreciation, so we begrudgingly pay through the nose, right?

    The ‘Service Executive’ contacted me mid-service to notify me of 2 barely-visible stone chips on the bonnet (which I was aware of), and then offered me a heinously shitty £12 ‘magic pen’ to remedy the grazes. I was reluctant, but somehow the sweet-talking hussy managed to wrap me around her stupid little finger and earn her commission. I know, I’m such a wally! In my defence, I was talking to her while ordering lunch, so I was distracted.

    The hysterical thing is (I’m laughing at myself here), I thought they were going to apply the magic pen for me. But I was quickly woken up from my fairy tale when they returned my car (it was a ‘pick-up, drop off’ service) with an unopened “Scratch Magic Pen” on the passenger’s seat. Urgh, they got me good! *slaps forehead*

    Letting agents are NOTORIOUS for selling junk, typically in the form of lousy, unsuitable tenants, particularly because agents work on commission, so they just want to close deals and move onto the next.

    It can be difficult to fight off the pressure of an agent, especially if you go by life avoiding confrontation, but resistance will serve you best here. Do NOT be afraid to reject ill-fitting tenants. You are NOT obligated to take every tenant thrown in front of your face.

  • Dump bullshit letting agents
    This is more of a thought-provoking point.

    I don’t use high-street agents, but if I did, and my agent blatantly tried to flog me a dead-horse, then I’d be reluctant to continue working with them. I’d begrudge paying for their services even if they did eventually pull-through, because clearly finding me a suitable tenant was not part of their game plan.

    While I didn’t advise the lady who emailed me to dump the chumps, I personally would have in her situation, because they evidently cared more about their commission than giving her a good service. I mean, come on, they tried to persuade her to accept tenants that failed the credit check and didn’t earn enough between them. That’s fucking shameful. Those agents should be sliced into digestible pieces and fed to the piggies.

    I remember years ago, when an agent tried to lumber me with a supremely hopeless tenant, in the form of a DSS single-parent that didn’t have the backing of a guarantor. The tenant was miraculously unqualified in every sense. The agent then got shitty with me because I wouldn’t accept the tenant. Un-bloody-liveable. How about you fucking stick her in your house then, mate?

    Needless to say, I cut my ties with the agent immediately. No one should be afraid of walking away when they’re not getting value for their money.

    I know I’ve been giving letting agents a terribly hard time in this blog post, but I do want to clarify that I am generalising. There are a lot of good agents out there (they’ll all be reading this blog post, so hi to you), and they’ll be as equally mortified and disappointed by those that continue to drag their profession through donkey piss.

  • Always keep your mind at ease
    As I’ve started to value my mental health and well-being more and more, I almost ALWAYS avoid situations that instinctively concern me. That means I rarely make decisions which will actively make me worry unnecessarily. The stress isn’t worth it.

    There’s nothing worse than accepting a tenant you’re unsure of, because you’ll always be on edge worrying. Don’t put yourself through that when you really don’t have to.

    Ask yourself, what will make you happier, a ‘suitable tenant’ or an ‘unqualified tenant’? It’s a no-brainer, right? Yet we often make it so difficult for ourselves. STOP! Make yourself happy.

If you have any reason to doubt the suitability of your prospective tenant, don’t let it go unnoticed, even if that means waiting longer to salvage mouth-watering tenants. Don’t just look for “better” tenants, find “suitable” tenants.

Adhering to good practices may negatively impact your short-term gains, but in the medium-to-long run the odds will be stacked in your favour. Most landlords that end up getting screwed over by rogue tenants could have avoided the situation by mitigating their risks (and that’s what finding good tenants is all about)! From my experience, giving tenants the benefit of doubt is suicide. Your applicants should either meet the requirements or fail to- do NOT go looking for reasons to pass a failed applicant (don’t allow your agent to do that either). Ya’ dig?

So, any thoughts, further advice, or similar experiences you want to share? Remember, we’re all in the circle of trust here xo

23 Join the Conversation...

Guest Avatar
Jenny 15th September, 2016 @ 15:14

Well said. Rental guarantees not worth the paper they are written on, and in any case it boils down to fairness under consumer laws. A judge could deem in unfair.

Guest Avatar
Val Graham 15th September, 2016 @ 16:26

I have not accepted tenants needing a guarantor for years.The last time, the tenant earned more than enough to pay the rent,but had a CCJ in her past.

On two occasions in the past,the parent/grandparent eagerly signed,in order to get shot of the psycho/junkie sleeping on their sofa,having no intention of honouring their side of the bargain if it came to it.

In any case,unless your property is an overpriced rathole,in the current climate you can pick and choose.A guarantor form is not worth the paper it is written on,don't believe otherwise!

Guest Avatar
Mark J 15th September, 2016 @ 16:36

Whilst I can not help to agree with your sentiments (it is because of you that I advertisedmy first BTL via open rent and not via an agent), sometimes you've got to look deeper.
Firstly, just because someone has no credit issues and can afford the rent, doesn't mean they won't be a problem (and I'm sure I read that HERE).
Secondly, just because on paper a couple can't afford the rent, doesn't mean they can't and won't afford the rent.
We had a couple who had been renting for 5 years in a small 2 bed housing association property, and "needed" 3 beds and a Garden, with extra kids having arrived.
The housing association had 3 bed houses, but not where you'd want to bring up your kids.
She was working part time in a solicitors, and he was a self employed jobbing builder. He mentioned in passing that when work dried up in 2008-2009, he'd worked in a call centre and in a pub to make sure they had enough money. I could have taken that 2 ways. Either your trade is risky, or you have a work ethic.
Total (declared) income was hardly startling, and they'd have to find an extra £120 a month above what they were paying. They offered a good reference.
What swung it for me, was the risk they were taking, moving out of the protection of the housing authority, and into private renting.

We had a lot of interest in that house, but they were more committed to living there long term than any of the others, who all seemed to be looking for a stop gap.

So against all logic we went with them.

A good agent would have sold us the couple that were moving (retiring) to Denmark and had sold their house, but had yet to find anywhere suitable so wanted to rent, whilst she worked until her pension start date some 6 months away whilst he found them a house to retire to. Thus the agent would be selling us another tenant 6 months later.

So far, 9 months rent paid on time, and no complaints from them. When we did an inspection, they'd made it home.

Guest Avatar
Ladyland 15th September, 2016 @ 16:38

You're so, so right but I'm just a complete sucker for a sob story.

I've been through some tough times myself and sometimes I've been given the benefit of the doubt myself and I'm eternally grateful. But then I've always been a 100% reliable tenant and debtor, I've never missed or been late on a payment for anything in my entire life, no matter how tough times are. So it's really hard for me not to empathise with some of the stories I get, and on many occasions I have made the wrong decision and given tenants the benefit of the doubt. Thankfully, most of the time it worked out okay (or okay-adjacent), but when it doesn't - prepare to be well and truly taken to the cleaners. Anyway, I did eventually learn my lesson.

I feel bad about no longer being willing to give people the benefit of the doubt because some people really do deserve it - but there's no way of filtering those people from the rest. So these days I do exactly what you're advising in your article and stick to suitable tenants, no matter how sympathetic I am with everyone else.

The Landlord Avatar
The Landlord 15th September, 2016 @ 17:53

Totally agree!

In this climate landlords have the luxury of picking and choosing, so they shouldn't need to settle!

@Mark J
Yup, that definitely sounds like something I said.

The thing is, it's about mitigating risk and limiting damage. There is NO silver-bullet solution to finding good tenants. Even the best tenants can quickly wither into nightmare tenants, and that's because everyone's circumstance can change.

If you have 10 tenants, 5 which are professionals with perfect credit ratings, and 5 with average jobs and poor credit ratings, the odds are you'll get more problems from the latter 5. But, that's not to say one or two won't go against the odds. But you get my point about mitigating risk.

Now, I'm all for judging each case on its own merit, as you did. But you've still always got to play close attention to the odds.

Out of curiosity, how was your experience with OpenRent? Did I do good by encouraging you in that direction?

Guest Avatar
Landlord with Dss 15th September, 2016 @ 17:58

Hi landlord,

Your email last links to the wrong blog post, that's why someone on the previous post was wondering why they got your email a month late!


The Landlord Avatar
The Landlord 15th September, 2016 @ 18:09

I think we've walked a similar path.

I used to be really quite sympathetic, but it became quite detrimental for business, and all it did was increase my stress levels. I've been burnt one too many times by people that have no regard for anyone else but themselves, and are happy to abuse the system.

Like you said, filtering the genuine, deserving people from the rest is near impossible.

'The system' needs to make it safer for landlords to help those in need, and make it more difficult for the abusers to operate, but everything seems to be going in the opposite direction.

The Landlord Avatar
The Landlord 15th September, 2016 @ 18:21

@Landlord with Dss
Ahhh thank you! That explains it. Man, I'm such a div! I've put a fix in place.

Guest Avatar
Shaun 16th September, 2016 @ 09:56

Having been a professional buyer for 30 years I don't have a heart (or that's what sales reps told me!), so no problem.
Having said that I can still get caught out.

Guest Avatar
Paul 18th September, 2016 @ 08:39

People it is quite simple to accept guarantors for duff tenants
You just obtain RGI on the guarantors on behalf of the duff tenants
Any guarantor that cannot qualify for RGI is as much use as a chocolate teapot!
To be a guarantor with RGI on you for a tenant you wish to be a guarantor for you'd have to he off your rocker.
If the tenant defaulted the RGI would pay out to the LL.
The RGI company will then pursue the guarantors for full recovery.
Nobody with any sense would be a guarantor with RGI on them
Being a guarantor without RGI on you means nothing and you can avoid guaranteeing any losses.
So LL just have to find mug guarantors for tenants who fail checks etc.
If the LL can source guarantors that are nug enough to gave RGI on them then happy days for the LL
As suggested even good tenants can turn into wronguns.
But having RGI at the outset of the tenancy can be a lifesaver for the LL.
It also works with RGI on the guarantors if any.
So guarantors are great if they qualify for RGI
I'm sure that very few of these guarantors who accept a RGI policy on them fully understand the potential ramifications for them if the RGI policy is ever claimed on by the LL.
Little Tommy could potentially bankrupt the guarantors!
One reason why I would NEVER be a guarantor.
Only a guarantor qualifying for RGI is worth it
Ignore all other guarantors who can't pass RGI checks.
It can be possible to recover losses from a guarantor who doesn't have RGI on them, but it is a very lengthy civil recovery procedure
Most LL need RGI to cover defaulted rent for the average 45 weeks it takes to evict rent defaulting scum
Very few tenants will behave honourably and vacate if they can't afford the rent.
Quite frankly if such tenants engaged with the LL when such problems arise I reckon many LL would work with the tenant to resolve rent shortfall issues.
Yes it means the LL becoming involved in the domestic lives of their tenants.
But sometimes tenants are not being deliberately stroppy, some do need genuine assistance to manage their affairs.
It would seem to me that if the LL was able to become involved it might prevent the tenant being evicted.
But if course many tenants ignore the issues until too late.
By which time the LL us thoroughly fed up and wants shot of his wrongun tenant.
This November many LL who have tenants on any firm of benefit will be noticing rent shortfalls.
They need to engage now with their tenants as to how they are to cope with the OBC reductions.
Any LL that can achieve RGI on their tenants should do so now.
If the tenants fail to qualify then try for RGI on any potential guarantor.
Without RGI on tenants or guarantors you are on your own and fully exposed financially to rent defaulting tenants if which there will be many this coming November
LL watch out!
Get your RGI on tenants or guarantors sorted out, like yesterday.
You are to be hit by a rent defaulting storm.
Be afraid, be very afraid!

The Landlord Avatar
The Landlord 18th September, 2016 @ 09:03

I agree, RGI's are useful, and I recommend all landlords to get a policy on new tenants.

However, I wouldn't get RGI to accommodate "duff tenants" - that seems kinda' odd. Why not just get tenants that aren't duff, instead of putting yourself in a position where you 'need' insurance? Aren't you just relying on court cases and legal proceedings from the offset? You wouldn't be mitigating the risks, you'd just be preparing for the bad times, when you should be doing both.

On a sidenote, I didn't even know you could get RGI for specifically the guarantor (I think that's what you were saying, unless I misunderstood). From what I'm aware, you get the RGI for the tenants (which by definition, the "duff tenants" probably wouldn't qualify for) and that includes legal proceedings on the Guarantor (if it comes to that).


P.s. "Very few tenants will behave honourably and vacate if they can't afford the rent." So true :)

Guest Avatar
Paul 18th September, 2016 @ 09:20

Yep agree with you regarding duff tenants
Perhaps I didn't qualify what I meant.
Essentially I refer to tenants who whilst they can afford the rent can't pass RGI checks.
This doesn't mean they can't afford the rent.
The only reason I would consider them duff is due to their inability to qualify for RGI.
I will not take on any tenant who caanot pass RGI checks along with other DD which is why network referencing can be so useful.
If the tenant can source guarantors who qualify for RGI on behalf of the tenants then fine.
Duff was perhaps a not very descriptive term for tenant types.
Any LL that accepts tenants without RGI takes massive financial risks.
Their business choice of course.
A guarantor is the second best solution, but without RGI on them bit a lit of use.
2 missed mortgage payments and the LL would he in LPA receivership.
Lenders have no mercy with LL
38000 LL were repossessed last year due to rent defaulting tenants
RGI would have saved those LL.
The big problem for LL is sourcing tenants of sufficient quality.
Something too few LL even consider when they start out.
I know I didn't!
I thought you just got tenants and they paid rent, jib done!!
Well viy oh boy did I learn I had a lot to learn
I was definitely one of those very naive LL you refer to.
Shame I didn't know about your site when I first started out.
But then I didn't even know what a google search was!
So I reckon I was destined to f##k up!!
Still I have learnt albeit some later than never.
Will other LL have to go through what I have!?
I hope not.
The more read your brilliant site the fewer of us will f##k up!!
I do wonder how many LL actually know about such useful sites as yours.
The stuff you disseminate could be a lifesaver for many a dopey LL.
Keep u the good work and let's hope more LL and prospective ones are aware of what you do.

The Landlord Avatar
The Landlord 19th September, 2016 @ 22:02

Ahh yeah, I get ya. But I think I'd still rather have a landlord that can pass the RGI checks :)

So, can you actually get RGI on just the guarantors (and not the tenant)? I didn't think that was an option.

Thanks for the kind words, appreciated!!

Guest Avatar
Paul 20th September, 2016 @ 03:17

Yep it is possible
Castledene a very successful LA up North who have appeared on several LL programmes
They use this RGI strategy all the time for their DSS tenants.
Never used the facility myself though.

Guest Avatar
David 21st September, 2016 @ 12:58

This was turning out to be an interesting blog but then Paul aka RGI Paul polluted it with RGI RGI RGI.

Of course this message will get a 30,000 word response from RGI Paul! Or he may play the victim for a few days and then pile in with a 30,000 word retort later.

The gut instinct is definately worth more than anything.

Personally I would not rent to tenants who can't afford the rent.

The reality is that at some point one of them will lose employment and the LHA allowance for Housing Benefit will not meet such a high rent.

I like the sentiment of @Mark J but I think anyone who is in HA property would be mad to leave it. Subsidised rent, ability to transfer within the system. Plus it will be interesting to see how they change if hard times come.

I think this is an issue about Markets, you will know whether your property is top end, affordable by rich Arab or Russian, a shit hole that needs work or a property somewhere in between.

If you do up your property to a very very high standard you can reasonably ask for a very high rent. You are not just aiming at "professionals" you are aiming at people with more money than sense.

So knowing that Market, why would you rent to anyone who could not afford it, guarantor or not?

Guest Avatar
Paul 21st September, 2016 @ 16:03

Know need to bang on about RGI
It is just part of a LL armoury to protect Hus business.
Many LL choose not to use insurance to protect against the long eviction periods
That is their business choice.
Some risk tenants who can't qualify for RGI
That again is their business risk choice.
The facts remain though that without RGI the LL is at the mercy of the dysfunctional court eviction processes.
There is no right or wrong business choice
Every LL must determine what risks they wish their business to carry.
As you suggest anyone can find themselves on HB.
LL need to be aware of this and decide whether they wish to risk not having RGI.
But as you have intimated things are to be a lot tougher when the OBC is reduced.
Of course there is still a way to have as many benefits as you want.
Basically by working at least 16 hrs PW.
Something that millions of migrants seem to be able to achieve so why not our own unemployed!?
But as with any tenant choice LL have to decide whatcrisks they are prepared to risk with certain tenant types
Tenants can count themselves as fortunate that many LL are prepared to take the extreme risks that renting to certain tenant types causes.
Hats off to LL I think!
Those LL of nervous disposition and less inclined to take risks will like me continue to insist on tenants qualifying for RGI.
We LL have to manage our own destiny. I do this by using RGI.
Other LL are prepared to take bigger risks than me!!

Guest Avatar
David 22nd September, 2016 @ 11:11

As predicted you continue to promote promote promote.

You make the blog unreadable and waste users time.

Your repeated bullshit post is off topic or just banging on and on about the same crap.

I would hope that @Landlord would delete your obvious promotions because they polute every thread you post in.

I guess I will have to just vote with my feet and unsubscribe.

Shame as I have contributed a lot to this site by genuinely trying to help Landlord and Tenant alike.

Guest Avatar
Paul 22nd September, 2016 @ 12:02

Far from polluting my posts are of far more value than yours and contribute to LL protecting themselves from dodgy tenants.
You have failed to come up with any alternatives to facilitate protection for LL against dodgy tenants.
Guarantors have limited capability in providing such protection.
I am aware of the issues with claiming from guarantors that you clearly aren't.
It would seem from your posts that you are fundamentally against any LL protecting themselves from the effects of a dodgy tenant be that RGI, decent referencing or anything else for that matter.
Some of your comments have been libellous and have been removed.
I fail to see how my helpful comments can be considered to have been anything but that.
This is a site that looks after the best interests of LL. These may at times be diametrically opposed to a tenant's interests.
So if any posts should be deleted it is yours.
You have contributed nothing towards the debate concerning how LL may protect themselves from tenants.
This is what the thread has been about.
If you wish to complain about such measures you really need to post on a tenant site where they maybe interested in your distorted views
As LL on this site we aren't interested unless you have something useful to contribute.
So far you have not said anything which would assist me to protect myself from dodgy tenants.
We clearly have different agendas.
Which is fair enough, but your agenda is not compatible with what this site is attempting to achieve.
We are LL looking out for other LL.
Something that it seems you have no interest in.
I suggest you are posting on the wrong site.
Go tell it to someone who may be interested in your views as I doubt many LL are in yours!

Guest Avatar
Catherine 22nd September, 2016 @ 20:29


In answer to your question re- wombats. I knew. :D

Did you know wombat poo is square?

The Landlord Avatar
The Landlord 22nd September, 2016 @ 20:49

Why the hell would you know something like that? So ridiculous!

SHUT THE FRONT DOOR!! I just Google'd "wombat poo" and it actually is square!! Haha, they look like little cakes!!!

Guest Avatar
Catherine 22nd September, 2016 @ 20:59


They do look quite yummy, don't they? Like chocolate brownies. I wonder if they have a gooey centre..

Apparently their poo is square because they poo on rocks to mark their territory and the square shape doesn't roll off the rocks, resulting in mass confusion and wombat turf wars.

You learn something new every day, eh? I feel as though I have given a little something back after all I have learnt from your blog :D

Guest Avatar
Andrewa 29th September, 2016 @ 20:50

By definition a professional estate agent is someone who is an expert in collecting commision payments whereas a professional landlord is an expert at consistently collecting rent. The one has extremely short term interests while the other is compelled to consider the longer term. I too consider rgi an excellent idea and do not rent without it.

Guest Avatar
Ian 12th November, 2016 @ 12:18

Great post. Informative and extremely funny.😂

















Your personal information will *never* be sold or shared to a 3rd party. By submitting your details, you agree to our Privacy Policy.

I want more info on...