By the time someone applies, I've already met them

A prospect calls me, views the apartment and says they want to rent it. I give the agent their phone number or email and the unit. The agent sends the application link, and the prospect fills it in.

Then someone has to compare the answers with what I need in a tenant.

A verdict without reasons is no use to me

Collecting a form is easy. Judging it goes wrong:

  • Borrowed rules: the agent fills a gap with an income threshold or occupancy limit it saw in other rental applications.
  • Bare scores: a number with no explanation.
  • Silent rejections: a blank answer quietly becomes "does not qualify."
  • Stale results: the applicant corrects an answer, and the old assessment still looks current.

Picture a fictional applicant for a ₮1,500,000 unit. The agent marks them unqualified against an income rule I never set. I find out only when I ask why, and now I'm rechecking the form myself.

Apply my rules and show the working

I'm supplying the application fields and criteria one by one. Until a rule exists, the agent can't use it.

  1. Start from my enquiry. The application follows the conversation and viewing I've already had.
  2. Ask only what a criterion needs. Each question collects an answer for a rule I've actually set.
  3. Check every supplied criterion. The report shows the rule, the answer, the result and why, and the version of answers and rules used.
  4. Keep missing information separate. No criteria yet means rules needed. A missing required answer means incomplete. Neither becomes a rejection.
  5. Give the verdict. With complete inputs, the agent reports qualifies or does not qualify, with the reasons alongside.
  6. Recheck after any change. A corrected answer or clarified rule makes the old assessment stale. The agent re-evaluates and keeps enough history to explain the new result.

I review each assessment myself, rule by rule.

My process supplies the rules. The agent does the checking.

The applicant fills the missing answer; the first assessment is marked stale and the agent re-evaluates, keeping both versions so the change can be explained.
A changed answer makes the old result stale. The agent rechecks and keeps both versions.

A clear answer, and the decision stays mine

What I get back is one of three results:

  • Qualifies or does not qualify: the verdict, with the reason for each criterion.
  • Incomplete: which answer is missing under a supplied rule.
  • Rules needed: there's nothing to assess against yet.

The report comes to me. It doesn't reject the applicant, send a follow-up or dispatch a contract. What happens next is my call.

The examples are fictional, and my actual criteria and application fields aren't defined yet. Once they are, the agent takes over the repetitive comparison.