After 17 days, should I relax my screening criteria or keep waiting?

[teaAndPath]

I’ve been reviewing applicants for a 4-bed duplex in Buenos Aires for 17 days. The strongest income, references and credit history all belong to different people, so there is no obvious choice.

I want a written, consistent process that does not reject a potentially reliable long-term tenant just because one indicator is weaker. Which criteria are genuinely useful for predicting payment reliability and retention? I’m also wondering whether the delay suggests the market rent is wrong. Please distinguish current Argentine legal requirements from personal risk tolerance, particularly around deposits and notice rules.

 

[direct_sparrow]

I would prioritize verifiable ability to pay, a consistent payment history and whether the proposed move-in date and household arrangements fit the tenancy. Apply the same questions and document requests to everyone, then record the reason for the decision.

A rigid income multiple can create false confidence, while an enthusiastic reference may say little. Credit history should be considered in context rather than allowed to decide the application by itself.

 

[direct_sparrow]

One missing detail: does “17 days” mean 17 days advertised, or 17 days already vacant? Those have very different costs. Also, have you received plenty of complete applications or mostly unsuitable enquiries? If good applicants repeatedly hesitate at the same point, I would reconsider the rent, condition or terms before lowering the screening standard.

 

[radar.round]

I’d rather identify the applicant most likely to be a steady long-term tenant, but an impressive payment record is not decisive unless you know what was paid and can verify it. Someone with little documented history may have secure current income, while someone with a spotless record may be taking on more rent than they can comfortably manage.

Ask each finalist the same questions about intended tenancy length, household plans and how they report maintenance problems. Review the duplex’s repair history as well, since recurring unresolved faults can drive turnover regardless of screening. I also would not use a larger deposit to compensate for uncertainty without first confirming what the current local rules permit.

 

[bench.wise]

A practical next step is to score only the evidence you already decided was relevant, then compare the leading applicants without adding new hurdles for one person. Separately calculate another week of vacancy against the plausible cost of choosing badly and turning the property over again.

Before accepting money or issuing terms, confirm the current Buenos Aires/Argentine rules on deposits, permitted documentation and notice with a local professional. Those legal boundaries should not be mixed into a personal preference for a larger safety margin.