How to screen tenants the right way
Most tenancy problems are preventable. Not every one but most. The ones that hurt landlords the most usually trace back to a screening process that moved too fast, trusted too easily, or skipped something important. This guide covers everything worth checking, and why it matters.
The tenant you choose is the single biggest decision you make as a landlord
Perth's rental market is still strong. Vacancy rates are historically low, which means landlords often feel pressure to move quickly approve the first decent-looking application and get the rent rolling. That is exactly when corners get cut and problems start. A bad tenancy in Perth can cost you months of lost rent, thousands in repairs, and weeks of stress. A good one runs quietly for years. The difference usually comes down to what happened before the lease was signed.
What a bad tenancy actually costs
Unpaid rent, damage beyond the bond, reletting fees, vacancy, legal costs and the time you spend managing it all. Industry estimates put the average cost of a failed tenancy at over $10,000 once everything is tallied up. That is several years of management fees.
What good screening actually achieves
A tenant who pays on time, looks after the place, renews the lease and lets you sleep at night. The best tenancies are quiet ones. You should hear very little from a well-chosen tenant other than the sound of rent hitting your account.
Everyone deserves a fair chance to find a home
Before we get into the screening process, it is worth saying something that matters a lot to us. A home is not a luxury. It is a basic human need. The people applying for your property are looking for somewhere safe and stable to live, and some of them face that search with significant extra difficulty, not because of anything they have done wrong, but because of who they are.
Discrimination in rental housing is real, it is documented, and it causes genuine harm. The WA Equal Opportunity Commission has repeatedly found that race, disability and family status are among the most common grounds for housing complaints in this state. Most of it is not dramatic or obvious. It is a gut feeling acted on without scrutiny, an assumption made without evidence, a criterion applied that sounds neutral but consistently excludes certain people.
Good screening is not about finding reasons to say no. It is about finding evidence to say yes or no fairly, consistently and with documentation. The process on this page is designed to do exactly that.
Single parent, six children, declined despite meeting every financial requirement
An Aboriginal woman applying for a four-bedroom rental in a regional town was declined even though she could pay the bond and had proof of sufficient income. The agent later indicated the landlord was concerned the property was not large enough and that her child with a behavioural disability would damage it. After a complaint was lodged with the Anti-Discrimination Commission, conciliation resulted in the landlord agreeing to lease her the property. The income was fine. The concern was the family.
Source: Anti-Discrimination NSW case study (name changed to protect privacy)
Race, disability and the rental crisis: what WA data shows
The WA Equal Opportunity Commission has documented that race, disability and age are consistently among the most nominated grounds for discrimination complaints relating to accommodation. In one period, nearly half of all race complaints made to the Commission related to accommodation. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander applicants are disproportionately represented. People with disability face barriers that often have nothing to do with their ability to pay rent or look after a property.
Source: WA Equal Opportunity Commission annual reports and announcements
A mother applying for her son with a disability, declined without explanation
A woman applied for a rental property on behalf of her adult son who has a disability. The application was declined. The Anti-Discrimination Commission received the complaint. Cases like this, where disability is the assumed basis for a refusal rather than any financial or tenancy-related concern, are among the most commonly lodged. The person applying was not a risk. They were just different from what the landlord had imagined.
Source: Anti-Discrimination NSW case studies (details changed to protect privacy)
What the Equal Opportunity Act 1984 (WA) actually protects
Under WA law, it is unlawful to discriminate against a rental applicant on the basis of race, sex, pregnancy, marital status, family status or responsibility, sexual orientation, age, disability, religious belief or political conviction, among others. This means a landlord cannot decline an application, or apply different screening standards, because of any of these attributes.
Some examples of what indirect discrimination looks like in practice, drawn from WA Equal Opportunity Commission guidance: setting an income requirement that is higher than the property actually justifies; having a blanket policy against families with children in a property that is clearly large enough; refusing to consider applicants receiving Centrelink or housing assistance as a source of income; applying stricter criteria to applicants whose names suggest a particular cultural background. None of these need to be intentional to be unlawful.
Complaints can be lodged with the WA Equal Opportunity Commission. Where conciliation fails, matters can be referred to the State Administrative Tribunal. Outcomes have included orders to lease the property, financial compensation and documented findings of unlawful conduct.
Fair screening protects everyone
A rigorous, consistent, evidence-based screening process is the best protection against both bad tenancies and discrimination complaints. When you make decisions based on documented financial capacity, verified rental history and objective checks applied equally to every applicant, you are doing the right thing by everyone. The process on this page is built on exactly that principle. If you are ever unsure whether a decision is based on legitimate screening criteria, ask yourself honestly: would I apply this same reasoning to every other applicant?
Five things worth checking on every single application
There is no magic formula that guarantees a great tenant. But there are five areas where a thorough check significantly reduces your risk. Skip any of them and you are making a decision with incomplete information.
Identity
Is this actually the person they say they are? Sight originals. Check the back of the licence. Run the demerit point check.
Income
Can they genuinely afford this property? Payslips and bank statements together. Rent should be under 35% of gross income.
Rental history
How did they treat the last place? Phone reference only to a number you find yourself, not the one on the application.
Database checks
What do TICA, NTD, eCourts and a credit check show? History that landlords never mention often lives here.
Overall fit
Is this property the right fit for this person? Occupant numbers, pets, lease term and the things that do not quite add up.
Use the screening tool
Run through all five areas with our interactive screening risk assessor below. It takes about 5 minutes and gives you a clear verdict.
How to screen a tenant properly in Perth
Here is the process we use at Local Property Partners for every application the same process that contributed to the REIWA 2025 Residential Property Manager of the Year award. You can follow this yourself or use it as a benchmark for what your property manager should be doing.
Verify identity with original documents in person
Sight original documents only. Never accept photocopies or digital scans as your only verification. Check the back of the driver's licence for the licence card number this changes every time a new licence is issued and is difficult to replicate on a fake. Run a WA demerit point check at transport.wa.gov.au to confirm the licence is genuine and registered to the person in front of you. Cross-check the name and DOB across every document provided. Note any discrepancies and ask about them directly.
Check income properly not just payslips
Ask for a minimum of two payslips and three months of bank statements. The payslip amounts, frequency and employer name should all appear in the bank statement deposits. If they do not align, ask why. Calculate the rent-to-income ratio precisely: weekly rent multiplied by 52, divided by gross annual income. Anything above 35% deserves additional scrutiny. Above 40% is high risk regardless of how good the rest of the application looks.
If the applicant is self-employed, the process is different and requires more, not less, scrutiny. Self-employed income is the hardest to verify and the easiest to overstate. Do not accept payslips a self-employed person has generated for themselves. Instead, require all of the following: a current ABN (check it at abn.business.gov.au), two years of ATO Notice of Assessment documents, three to six months of business bank statements showing consistent income, and an accountant's letter confirming annual drawings or income. The letter alone is not enough. Call the accountant independently using a number from their own website, not the number on the application, and confirm the letter is genuine and the income is as stated.
Check the ABN registration date at abn.business.gov.au and cross-reference it against how long they claim to have been trading. An ABN registered six months ago for someone who says they have been self-employed for five years is a flag worth following up. Also check whether the business name, ABN holder name and entity type are consistent with what they have told you.
Call the employer or accountant using a number you find yourself
For employed applicants: find the employer's main phone number through Google or their website, not the number on the application. Call and ask reception to confirm the applicant works there, their role and whether their employment is stable and ongoing. Most employers will confirm this without hesitation. If they say they have no record of that person, you have your answer.
For self-employed applicants: call the accountant using a number from the accountant's own website. Say you are verifying income for a rental application and ask them to confirm the letter is genuine and that the income stated is accurate. A legitimate accountant will confirm this. If they are evasive, say they cannot discuss it, or the number on the application does not match their website, treat this as a significant concern. Also consider whether the business has any visible online presence, reviews, or trading history that supports the claimed income level and trading period.
Call the landlord reference using a number you find yourself
A written reference letter proves nothing. Call the current landlord or property manager using a number you find independently. Ask: did they pay on time? Any arrears? How did they look after the property? Were there any inspection issues? Was the bond refunded in full? And then the question that reveals the most: "Would you rent to this person again without hesitation?" Any pause, qualifier or hedge is telling. A strong reference is immediate and unequivocal.
Keep reference results strictly confidential. The person giving you a reference is sharing information in good faith, often about someone they still have contact with. Disclosing what a reference said to the applicant, or to anyone else, could put the referee in an uncomfortable or potentially unsafe situation. Reference information should be used to inform your decision and documented internally. It should never be shared with the applicant or repeated outside the screening process.
You are not required to give the applicant a reason for declining. Under WA law, you do not need to explain why an application was unsuccessful. You should never reveal what a reference said as the basis for a decision. Simply confirm the outcome in writing and move on. This protects the referee, protects you, and is standard professional practice.
You can also check eCourts WA at ecourts.justice.wa.gov.au to search the applicant's full name for any tribunal or court history. This is a public register so accessing it is not a privacy breach. However, any result must be assessed proportionately and in context, not used as an automatic disqualifier. See the eCourts section below for the important nuance on this.
Run TICA, NTD and a credit check but follow the law
Under the Residential Tenancies Act 1987 (WA), if you typically use a tenancy database to screen tenants, you must provide the applicant with written notice (Form 18A) stating which databases you use before you run any check. This is a legal requirement not optional. A $1,000 modified penalty applies if you skip it. Run both TICA and NTD they do not always share data, so a listing can appear on one and not the other. If you find a listing, you must notify the applicant in writing within 7 days, including the name of the database, who made the listing and how they can challenge it. Keep a copy of that notification for at least 12 months.
Write up your decision and keep records
Whether you approve or decline, document your reasoning internally. For successful applicants, keep a record of what you verified and how. For unsuccessful applicants, record the specific reasons based on the factual information in the application, not personal characteristics. Under the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth), personal information from unsuccessful applicants should be destroyed securely after a reasonable retention period.
You are not required to give the applicant a reason for declining. Simply notify them in writing that their application was unsuccessful. Do not disclose what a reference said, what a database check showed, or any other specific finding. This protects referees who spoke to you in good faith, protects your process, and is standard practice. A well-documented internal decision protects you if you are ever challenged. What is written down internally is yours. What you tell the applicant is limited to the outcome.
Self-employed income needs more scrutiny, not less
Self-employed applicants are not higher-risk tenants by definition. Many are excellent. But verifying their income is genuinely harder than verifying a salary, and the documentation required is different. This is where a lot of landlords get caught out: accepting documents that look legitimate without doing the checks that confirm they actually are.
Do not accept self-generated payslips
A self-employed person can generate their own payslips. This proves nothing. The documents you need are issued by third parties: the ATO, their bank and their accountant. If any of these are missing, the income is unverified.
The minimum required documentation
Current ABN (check at abn.business.gov.au), two years of ATO Notice of Assessment, three to six months of business bank statements, and an accountant's letter confirming annual drawings or income. All four. Not some of them.
What to check for each document
ABN lookup
Check the registration date. Does it match how long they claim to have been trading? Is the name on the ABN the same as the applicant's name? Is the entity type (sole trader, company, trust) consistent with how they describe their business?
ATO Notice of Assessment
This is the most reliable income document for a self-employed person because it is issued by the ATO, not the applicant. Look at taxable income across two consecutive years. Consistent or growing income is reassuring. A significant drop in year two warrants a conversation.
Business bank statements
Look for consistent regular income deposits, not a pattern of a few large deposits close to the application date. Irregular income, large transfers from personal accounts or a thin transaction history relative to the claimed income are all worth querying.
Accountant's letter
Call the accountant independently using a number from their own website. Confirm the letter is genuine and the income is as stated. Ask how long they have been the applicant's accountant. A letter from someone they met last week is very different from one from an accountant with years of history.
The recently registered ABN is your biggest red flag
An ABN registered in the last six to twelve months for someone claiming years of self-employment income is a significant inconsistency. It does not automatically mean fraud, but it requires a direct explanation. Common legitimate reasons exist, such as changing business structure or previously being employed by their own company. But vague answers or evasiveness here should be treated seriously.
What the law says about screening tenants in Western Australia
The rules around tenant screening in WA are more specific than most landlords realise. The 2024 reforms added several new obligations. Here is what you need to know.
Residential Tenancies Act 1987 (WA) tenancy database obligations
If you typically use a tenancy database, you must provide Form 18A with every rental application. If you find a listing, you must notify the applicant in writing within 7 days. If you intend to list a tenant, you must give them 14 days to object first. A person can only be listed if they breached the agreement AND a court ordered termination, OR the tenancy ended with them owing more than the bond. Penalties for breaches run up to $1,000 per infringement.
The Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) also applies. You must obtain written consent before running a credit check, tell the applicant how their information will be used, store it securely and destroy it appropriately when no longer needed.
Under the Residential Tenancies Amendment Act 2024 (WA): rent can only increase once every 12 months; tenants have the right to request a pet and you must respond in writing within 14 days or consent is deemed; rent bidding is prohibited with penalties up to $10,000 per breach.
Tenant screening risk assessor
Work through five areas of every application. Get a live score, a clear verdict, and a personalised follow-up list. Takes about five minutes.
Enter your email to unlock the tool
We send occasional useful resources for Perth landlords, nothing else. Unsubscribe any time.
We do not share your details with third parties. See our privacy policy at localpropertypartners.com.au.
Red flags that are worth stopping for
These are not automatic declines. But each one warrants a pause, a direct question and a documented answer before you proceed.
Payslips and bank statements do not reconcile
The employer names, deposit amounts and pay frequency should all match. If they do not, ask why before you do anything else. This is the most common early indicator of fabricated documentation.
The rental reference hesitates before saying they would rent again
The pause is the answer. A strong reference is immediate and unqualified. Any version of "they were mostly fine" or "they had their moments" is a soft no that deserves direct follow-up. Remember: whatever a reference tells you stays with you. Never disclose what was said to the applicant.
Rent is above 40% of gross income
At this ratio the tenant is financially stretched. One unexpected bill, one missed shift, one change in circumstances and the rent starts coming in late. Do the calculation precisely every time do not estimate.
Employer cannot be independently verified
If the company does not appear to exist online, if the ABN is recently registered, or if calling the website number produces a different result from calling the application number stop and investigate before proceeding.
eCourts returns tribunal history but assess it proportionately
eCourts is a public register and checking it is not a privacy breach. But a result is not an automatic decline. A bond dispute from 8 years ago is very different from an eviction order last year. Assess findings in context, document your reasoning, and be aware that using a past civil record as a blanket disqualifier could constitute indirect discrimination under the Equal Opportunity Act 1984 (WA) if it disproportionately disadvantages a protected group. The question is always whether this specific finding gives you a genuine and proportionate reason to decline.
Reference results must stay confidential
The person who gave you a reference shared information in good faith, often about someone they still have contact with. Never disclose what a reference said to the applicant or anyone else. This protects the referee from potential awkwardness or harm, and it protects you from disputes. You are not required to give the applicant a reason for declining. Simply notify them in writing that their application was unsuccessful and leave it there.
Using eCourts results fairly and lawfully
This is a nuance that most screening guides skip over entirely. It matters.
Checking eCourts is not a privacy breach
The WA Magistrates Court eCourts portal is a publicly accessible register. Searching an applicant's name on it is not a breach of the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) you are accessing information that is open to anyone. This is well-established and is a legitimate part of a professional screening process.
What you find must be assessed proportionately
A result on eCourts is not an automatic decline. Using a past civil record as a blanket disqualifier without considering the context, age and circumstances can cross into unfair territory, and in some cases unlawful territory.
Indirect discrimination and the Equal Opportunity Act 1984 (WA)
Under the Equal Opportunity Act 1984 (WA), you cannot refuse a tenancy on the basis of protected attributes including race, sex, age, disability, family status, sexual orientation and others. Direct discrimination is obvious. Indirect discrimination is more subtle: it occurs when a screening criterion that appears neutral in practice disproportionately disadvantages people from a protected group.
If a policy of automatically declining any applicant with an eCourts listing disproportionately excludes people from a particular demographic, that could constitute indirect discrimination even if that was never the intention. The test is whether the criterion is reasonably necessary given all the circumstances.
What this means in practice: treat an eCourts result as one piece of information to weigh alongside everything else. Document what you found, what you assessed it to mean in context, and why it did or did not affect your decision. A recent eviction order for significant unpaid rent is a very different finding from a bond dispute from a decade ago that was settled. Treat them differently.
What to document when you find something
If an eCourts search returns a result, write down: what the listing was for, when it occurred, whether it appears resolved, and how you weighed it against the rest of the application. This documentation protects you if a decision is ever challenged.
This applies to all database findings TICA, NTD, credit checks and eCourts alike. A well-documented proportionate decision is defensible. An undocumented blanket rejection is not.
Screening for a share house is a different conversation entirely
Room-by-room rentals and share houses carry a different risk profile from standard tenancies. Multiple tenants share a space, often with individual leases, different income levels, different personal situations and varying degrees of stake in the property. The screening process needs to reflect that.
Screen each room tenant individually
Every person on their own lease needs to go through the full screening process independently. Do not assume that because one tenant is strong, their housemates will be. Each person needs their own income check, reference and database check.
Income ratio applies per person
In a share house each tenant pays their portion of rent. Apply the 35% rent-to-income rule to each person's individual rent contribution, not the total rent. A tenant paying $250 per week needs to earn at least around $715 per week gross to sit comfortably under the threshold.
Ask about shared living experience
Has the applicant lived in a share house before? How did it go? Do they have a reference from a co-tenant situation? People who have successfully shared before are generally lower risk than those who have never had to negotiate shared spaces.
Compatibility with existing tenants matters
In a share house, a problem tenant does not just affect the landlord. It affects the other tenants too. Conflict between housemates is one of the most common sources of early vacates, complaints and property damage in share houses. It is reasonable to consider fit carefully.
Lodging house licensing may apply
In WA, renting rooms in a property with 4 or more tenants who are not a family group may require a lodging house licence under the Health (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1911. Check with your local council before operating a multi-room rental to ensure you are compliant.
Higher intensity management required
Share houses generate significantly more management activity than standard tenancies. More maintenance requests, more communication, more tenant turnover. If you are self-managing a share house, be realistic about the time and systems required. Most landlords underestimate it significantly.
Can you ask for a police check? Yes. But use the result carefully.
Police checks come up regularly in tenant screening, particularly for share houses and higher-risk properties. Here is what you need to understand before you ask for one or act on the result.
You can ask, but you cannot compel
You can request that an applicant provide a National Police Certificate as part of their application. There is no law in WA that prohibits asking. However, a tenant can decline to provide one and their refusal alone cannot lawfully be the sole basis for declining their application. If you make police check consent a condition of applying, you may also be creating barriers that disproportionately disadvantage certain groups, which carries indirect discrimination risk.
Spent convictions cannot be used against the applicant
Under the Spent Convictions Act 1988 (WA), certain older convictions are spent after 10 years for adults (5 years for juveniles). An applicant with a spent conviction is not required to disclose it, and you cannot lawfully act on it even if it appears on a check. Using a spent conviction as a basis for declining an application is unlawful.
The blanket policy problem and indirect discrimination
A policy of automatically declining any applicant with a criminal record is potentially unlawful under the Equal Opportunity Act 1984 (WA). Criminal records statistically affect certain demographic groups at higher rates due to factors outside their control, meaning a blanket ban can constitute indirect discrimination even if that was not your intention. The relevant question is always whether a specific finding, on its own facts, gives you a genuine and proportionate reason to decline and whether that reason relates meaningfully to the tenancy.
If you are going to take a criminal record into account, ask yourself: what was the offence? How long ago? Is it relevant to this tenancy? Has there been any evidence of rehabilitation? A serious recent conviction for property damage or violence is clearly relevant to a rental decision. A minor conviction from fifteen years ago is a very different matter and should be weighed accordingly. Document your reasoning either way.
Share houses and live-in owner situations
A police check is most defensible where there is a genuine and documented safety consideration that goes beyond standard tenancy risk. The clearest example is where the property owner lives on site with the tenant, or where tenants share facilities closely with vulnerable occupants. In these circumstances, a legitimate safety interest is easier to articulate and document. Even then, the same proportionality principles apply.
If you manage share houses as part of a portfolio and want to incorporate police checks into your process, discuss the approach with a legal adviser familiar with WA tenancy and equal opportunity law before making it standard practice.
What a professional property manager does that this tool cannot replicate
This tool covers the process well. But a licensed property manager brings tools, access and training that a self-managing landlord cannot easily replicate. Here is what sits behind the professional version of this process.
IP address conflict detection
Professional screening software flags when multiple applications arrive from the same IP address. This is a classic fraud indicator: the same person submitting applications under different names or with fabricated details. Self-managing landlords using paper or email applications cannot see this at all.
Discounted database access
Licensed property managers receive wholesale rates from Equifax, TICA, NTD and the major portals through volume agreements. A self-managing landlord pays retail, which is significantly higher per check. Running all the recommended checks through retail channels adds up quickly.
Automated cross-referencing
Platforms like 2Apply, Palace and PropertyMe cross-reference identity details, income claims and address histories automatically, flagging inconsistencies that a manual review might miss. The software does the heavy lifting before a human even looks at the application.
AML/CTF compliance obligations
From 2026, licensed real estate agents and property managers in Australia are subject to expanded anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing obligations under AUSTRAC. Professional PMs operate within a regulated framework with documented compliance processes. Self-managing landlords do not carry these same obligations, but the professional framework adds a layer of rigour that benefits the whole process.
Training in discrimination law
Licensed property managers in WA are required to hold a qualification and undertake continuing education. Understanding where screening crosses into indirect discrimination, how spent convictions work, and how to document proportionate decisions is part of that professional training. Getting this wrong as a self-managing landlord carries real consequences.
Consistency across every application
A professional screening process applies the same criteria to every applicant without exception. This consistency is itself a legal protection. If you run a police check on one applicant, you should run it on all. Selective application of any criterion is a discrimination risk regardless of intention.
If you are ever unsure about an application, it is worth a conversation before you make the call. An experienced property manager looking at the same application often sees something that is easy to miss when you are emotionally invested in getting the property leased.
Important: general information only, not professional or legal advice
The content on this page is general information about tenant screening processes and relevant WA legislation. It is not legal advice, not property management advice specific to your situation, and not a guarantee of any outcome. Every application is different and the right decision depends on the full facts in front of you.
Applying any part of this process incorrectly, incompletely or without understanding the legal context can result in outcomes including discrimination complaints, failed tenancies or other disputes. If you are uncertain about any aspect of a screening decision, consult a licensed property manager or legal adviser before acting. Local Property Partners is a licensed property management company in Western Australia. The content on this page reflects general professional practice and does not constitute a client relationship or create any duty of care to the reader.
Legislation referenced includes the Residential Tenancies Act 1987 (WA), Residential Tenancies Amendment Act 2024 (WA), Equal Opportunity Act 1984 (WA), Spent Convictions Act 1988 (WA), Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) and the Health (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1911 (WA). All legislative references are subject to change. Verify current provisions before relying on them.
What Perth landlords ask about screening tenants
Landlords who trust Local Property Partners with their screening
Helping Perth landlords across the northern suburbs and beyond
Local Property Partners is based in Padbury and manages investment properties across greater Perth. If your suburb is not listed, get in touch.
Want us to handle the screening for you?
Every application processed by Local Property Partners goes through the full screening process described on this page. No shortcuts, no guesswork.
Call or text Daria: 0422 238 434