HB 2323 does not provide transparency for the property owner or credit agencies and the result will be an increase in rent to cover the cost of additional insurance and late payments from bad renters.
Mark Harmsworth
Washington Policy Center
House Bill 2323 (HB 2323), introduced by Representative Strom Peterson (D-21), would require rental property owners to report rental payment history to a nationwide consumer credit agency. The reporting is only for on-time rent payments. There is no requirement to report late or missed rent payments.
Additionally, HB 2323, would require a rental property owner to stop reporting once a tenant is late on a rental payment.
Rental property owners have to balance the cost of renting a home against the risk assumed from a tenant who fails to pay on time. The cost of rent is driven by risk assumed.
Credit background checks allow property owners to make educated decisions on who the prospective renter is and evaluate the risk and cost of having that renter in the property. While most renters pay rent on time and take care of the home, there are some that do not.
The history of a tenant who does not pay on time would not appear on the credit reporting background check under HB 2323.
The bill also creates an unfunded government mandate on the rental property owner, who now has to take time each month to report rental payments to the credit agencies. This can be cost prohibitive and often the credit reporting setup fees can be several thousand and dollars, plus a monthly fee.
There is also a risk to the property owner that misreporting rental payments could open the door for a tenant to sue the property owner and be in violation of the fair credit reporting act.
HB 2323 does not provide transparency for the property owner or credit agencies and the result will be an increase in rent to cover the cost of additional insurance and late payments from bad renters.
Mark Harmsworth is the director of the Small Business Center at the Washington Policy Center.
Also read:
- Opinion: Tax day is painful enough without Washington adding its own
Washington’s new 9.9% income tax mirrors federal pattern: start narrow, expand to hit everyone within years. - POLL: What do you believe is the biggest reason school districts are facing budget shortfalls?
Districts across Washington warn of budget gaps as debate grows over rising costs versus inadequate state funding. - Opinion: The high cost of hiding – Why IBR’s delayed revenue study is a $15 billion warning sign
IBR delays critical toll revenue analysis until June 2027, hiding financial details until after project approval. - Opinion: The high cost of hiding – Why IBR’s delayed revenue study is a $15 billion warning sign
IBR delays critical toll revenue analysis until June 2027, hiding financial details until after project approval. - Opinion: Washington fails the test for affordability
Mountain States Policy Center analysis reveals Washington ranks 5th most expensive state as residents migrate to Idaho and Texas.
