Provides that a landlord shall provide a prospective tenant a written disclosure of the tenant screening criteria used to evaluate rental applications prior to accepting any fee, deposit, or screening information from such prospective tenant.
A09294 would require landlords to give prospective tenants a clear, written disclosure of the screening criteria used to evaluate rental applications before accepting any application fee, deposit, or screening information. The required disclosure must identify the factors the landlord uses, such as credit history, minimum credit score thresholds, criminal history policies, prior rental history, income requirements, reference requirements, and how incomplete or inaccurate applications are handled. It must also state whether a tenant screening report will be obtained, identify the consumer reporting agency if one is used, and summarize the applicant’s rights under federal and New York law regarding consumer reports, including the right to access and dispute report contents.
The bill also requires the disclosure to be presented conspicuously and acknowledged by the applicant, with a signed acknowledgment serving as evidence that the disclosure was provided. If the acknowledgment is not signed, there is a rebuttable presumption that the disclosure was not given. If a landlord rejects an applicant without first providing the required disclosure, the landlord must refund the full application fee and any application deposit, and must send that refund within 14 days of a written request. The bill would add a new section to the Real Property Law and take effect 120 days after becoming law.
The bill’s impact would be to impose new pre-application disclosure obligations on landlords and property managers in New York, while creating a refund remedy for applicants denied without receiving the required notice. It would affect rental application procedures, tenant screening practices, and the handling of application fees and deposits, and it would likely increase documentation and compliance requirements for landlords, leasing agents, and managing agents.
There is no recorded committee transcript or vote history provided, so the overall sentiment cannot be measured from debate or roll call data. Based on the bill text and caption, the measure appears aimed at improving transparency and consumer protection for renters, suggesting a generally tenant-friendly policy approach. The main potential point of contention is the added administrative burden on landlords and the possibility of disputes over whether the disclosure was properly provided, especially given the rebuttable presumption tied to the applicant’s acknowledgment.
The bill would amend the Real Property Law by adding a new section requiring landlords to disclose tenant screening criteria before collecting application-related fees, deposits, or screening information. It would also require notice of consumer reporting agency use, a summary of applicant rights regarding consumer reports, signed acknowledgment procedures, and refunds of fees and deposits when disclosure was not provided before denial. The measure would directly affect landlords, lessors, sublessors, managing agents, and other persons involved in renting housing accommodations, as well as rental applicants and consumer reporting agencies.
No committee discussion or vote record was provided, so there is no documented legislative sentiment to summarize from those sources. The bill’s stated purpose and structure indicate a pro-transparency, tenant-protection approach, with the likely support coming from renter advocates and consumer protection interests. Any opposition would likely come from landlord or property management interests concerned about compliance costs and procedural liability.
The primary likely point of contention is whether landlords should be required to disclose detailed screening criteria before any fee or application materials are accepted, since this adds a mandatory step to the rental process. Landlords and property managers may object to the administrative burden, the need to publish subjective criteria, and the risk of refund obligations if disclosure is later disputed. Tenant advocates would likely support the bill because it reduces surprise denials, improves fairness, and helps applicants understand screening standards and their rights before paying fees.