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:
- POLL: Did the Clark County Council make the right decision by rejecting the auditor authority proposal?
The 3-2 council vote rejected giving the auditor’s office power to write financial impact statements for ballot measures. - Opinion: Hospital price transparency is good, but its impact will be limited
Washington still shields hospitals from competition through certificate-of-need laws other states have repealed. - Opinion: Washington tax collections are running below forecast as the economy softens
Washington’s tax collections are $135.4 million behind forecast since February as employment and revenue both slip. - Opinion: Washington’s Attorney General offers strong defense of signature gatherers’ rights
AG Nick Brown urges 39 county prosecutors to protect signature gatherers from harassment and theft. - Letter: The IBR’s concrete obscenity
Bob Ortblad argues $17.7 billion buys one extra lane for five miles — and 30 years of debt for future generations.
