Information guide written by the ImmoMulti Team. This is not legal advice. Consult the official sources cited or a legal professional for your situation.
Choosing a good tenant is one of the most important decisions a plex owner makes — but in Quebec, screening is tightly regulated. Screening a tenant legally means assessing their ability to pay and their history without crossing the line into discrimination banned by the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms. As a direct buyer of multi-unit properties on the North Shore, ImmoMulti meets owners every week who don't realize a simple rental form can contain illegal questions. Here's what you may ask, what is strictly prohibited, and how to screen without exposing yourself to a complaint.
What can you legally verify about a rental applicant?
A landlord may verify identity, payment history (credit check with consent), references from previous landlords and the real ability to pay the rent. The principle governing everything is necessity: collect only the information strictly relevant to the rental relationship.
Quebec's Act respecting the protection of personal information in the private sector imposes a simple but powerful principle: a landlord may collect only the information necessary to assess the application. That's the filter to apply to every question on your rental form. Any detail that doesn't directly help establish whether the tenant can pay and respect the lease should not be requested.
In practice, it is legitimate to ask for: the name, contact details, employment or income source (to assess ability to pay), references from previous landlords, and — with authorization — a credit check. These items relate directly to the rental relationship. To start that relationship on the right foot, it also helps to know how to set the rent on a first lease and fill in Section F.
The credit check: permitted, but with consent
A credit check with Equifax or TransUnion is permitted to verify solvency, provided you obtain the applicant's free and informed written consent before running it. The social insurance number is not required for this.
Checking an applicant's credit file is the most reliable tool for assessing solvency. It's permitted in Quebec, but regulated. You must obtain written, free and informed consent before requesting a report from a credit assessment agency. The applicant must know exactly what they're consenting to and why.
A compliant credit check, in practice
- Obtain written, dated consent before any request.
- Identify the applicant by name, date of birth and addresses — no SIN needed.
- Use the result only to assess solvency, not for other purposes.
- Destroy or secure the report once the decision is made.
The social insurance number is not necessary to run a credit check: agencies can identify a person by other means. Quebec's Access to Information Commission recommends never collecting a SIN without a demonstrated need. An applicant has the right to refuse to provide it, and that refusal alone cannot justify a rejection.
What information is banned from asking?
A landlord may not require: the SIN, a security deposit or post-dated cheques beyond the first month, detailed immigration status, or information tied to a banned ground of discrimination (origin, religion, pregnancy, social assistance, etc.).
Some requests, seemingly ordinary, are prohibited or abusive. Quebec's Human Rights Commission (CDPDJ) lists them clearly. Here are the main ones to ban from your process:
Never require from a rental applicant
- The social insurance number (SIN).
- A security deposit, damage deposit or post-dated cheques.
- Detailed immigration status or proof of citizenship.
- Ethnic origin, "race," religion, mother tongue.
- Civil status, pregnancy or the intention to have children.
- Sexual orientation or gender identity.
- Receipt of social assistance or any other transfer income.
Recall too that no security deposit is permitted in Quebec: only the first month's rent may be required before move-in. Any amount claimed in advance beyond that first month is prohibited by the Civil Code, even for a file you consider risky.
Sources: Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse, Access to Information Commission and Éducaloi.
Which grounds of refusal are banned by the Charter?
Refusing a tenant on a ground listed in section 10 of the Charter — social condition, civil status, origin, religion, age, disability, sexual orientation, pregnancy, etc. — is illegal discrimination, subject to a complaint to the CDPDJ.
Section 10 of the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms prohibits discrimination based on a series of grounds. In housing, the most frequently at issue are social condition (which includes receiving social assistance or having a low income) and civil status (a single-parent family, a couple with children). Refusing an applicant on any of these grounds is illegal.
| Ground | Example of a banned refusal |
|---|---|
| Social condition | "I don't rent to people on social assistance." |
| Civil status / family | "No families with young children." |
| Origin / "race" | Rejecting an applicant because of their name or accent. |
| Pregnancy | Refusing an applicant because she is pregnant. |
| Disability | Refusing a tenant with a service animal. |
A tenant who believes they've been discriminated against can file a complaint with the CDPDJ, which may investigate and refer the matter to the Human Rights Tribunal. Awards for moral prejudice can be significant — a very real risk for a small landlord.
How to assess ability to pay without discriminating?
You have the right to assess whether an applicant can pay the rent. The legal nuance is essential: you assess a real ability to pay, not a category of people. The well-known "rent not exceeding 30% of income" rule is a management practice, not a legal obligation, and it cannot be used to exclude social assistance recipients or low-income earners outright — which would amount to discrimination on social condition.
- Consider all legitimate income sources, including benefits.
- Rely on verifiable facts: payment history, references.
- Apply the same criteria to every applicant.
- Document your decisions on an objective basis, in case they're challenged.
Rigorous property management doesn't stop at screening: it continues with a well-drafted lease (for example a pet clause compliant with Quebec law) and solid protection when problems arise, as our guide on insurance recourse for tenant-caused damage explains.
A compliant rental form, field by field
The rental form is the centrepiece of your process — and also the most common source of accidental illegality. Many plex owners use an old template found online or inherited from a previous owner, without asking whether every box still respects the Act respecting the protection of personal information in the private sector. The test is always the same: is this information necessary to establish whether the applicant can pay the rent and respect the lease? If the answer is no, the field must go.
Let's review the typical fields of a rental form, sorting them by legality. This grid lets you audit your own document in minutes.
Legitimate fields (keep them)
These details relate directly to ability to pay, identity or rental history. They are relevant and may be requested, provided you obtain the applicant's consent for any external verification.
- Identity: first and last name, contact details (phone, email).
- Current and previous addresses: useful for the credit check and to reach former landlords.
- Employment or income source: employer, position, seniority, or any other legitimate source (self-employment, pension, benefits).
- Previous landlords' contact details: to verify payment punctuality and behaviour.
- Credit check authorization: a written consent box, dated and signed.
- Number of occupants: to assess suitability, never to exclude families.
Fields to ban (illegal or abusive)
These boxes, seemingly ordinary, expose the landlord to a complaint to the Human Rights Commission (CDPDJ) or the Access to Information Commission. They have no place on a modern form.
| Field | Problem | Verdict |
|---|---|---|
| Social insurance number | Not necessary; collected without justification | Remove |
| Date of birth | Useful only for the credit check, with consent — otherwise touches age (protected ground) | Limit |
| Civil status / marital status | Prohibited ground of discrimination | Remove |
| Children / pregnancy | Civil status and pregnancy: protected grounds | Remove |
| Origin, mother tongue, religion | Prohibited grounds of discrimination | Remove |
| "On social assistance? yes/no" | Targets social condition | Remove |
| Detailed immigration status | Not necessary; touches national origin | Remove |
| Security deposit / post-dated cheques | Prohibited by the Civil Code | Remove |
One case deserves a nuance: the date of birth. It is not illegal in itself, since it helps correctly identify the applicant during a credit check. But it should appear only in the "credit check authorization" section, with the associated consent, not as a mandatory field at first contact. Collecting an age without need could suggest that you filter by age — a ground protected by the Charter.
Likewise, the "minimum income required: 3× the rent" note sometimes seen in listings must be handled carefully. A rigid threshold applied mechanically can have the effect of excluding social assistance recipients and clashing with the social condition ground. Better to assess a real ability to pay case by case, considering all income sources.
The reflex to adopt
- Reread each field asking: "is this necessary for the rental relationship?"
- Remove any question touching a ground in section 10 of the Charter.
- Isolate credit-check consent in a separately signed section.
- Never ask for the SIN or a security deposit.
The screening process, step by step
Rigorous screening isn't a gut feeling; it's a procedure you apply the same way to every applicant. That consistency is your best protection: if a decision is ever challenged, you can show that all applicants were treated by the same objective criteria. Here is the recommended sequence, from listing to lease signing.
Step 1 — Write a neutral listing
The listing sets the tone. Describe the unit, the rent, availability and objective conditions (non-smoking, for example, which is allowed). Avoid any wording that could suggest a preference about people: "ideal for a professional," "quiet couple without children" or "single person" are red flags that can read as discriminatory.
Step 2 — First contact and pre-screening
By phone or email, you may ask objective questions: desired move-in date, number of occupants, presence of a pet (if your lease has a clause about it). Ask nothing about origin, religion, family situation or income source at this stage. The goal is simply to arrange viewings.
Step 3 — The viewing
The viewing is to present the unit and answer questions. It's also a first exchange, but stay on rental-related topics. Personal questions asked "to get to know each other" (country of origin, plans for children, religion) are exactly the kind of remarks that, noted by a rejected applicant, can feed a complaint.
Step 4 — The form and consent
The interested applicant fills in the compliant form (see the previous section) and signs the credit-check authorization. This is when you collect the former landlords' and employer's contact details.
Step 5 — The verifications
You then run the credit check and reference calls. Apply the same verifications to every serious applicant: don't run a deep credit check on one and a simple call on another based on your impression.
Step 6 — The decision and its documentation
Compare applicants on objective criteria: payment history, solvency, references. Note briefly the reason for your choice. That written trace — "applicant chosen: best payment history and positive references" — is worth its weight in gold if the decision is ever questioned.
| Step | What's allowed | What to avoid |
|---|---|---|
| Listing | Describe the unit, rent, non-smoking | "No children," "professional only" |
| Pre-screening | Move-in date, number of occupants | Origin, religion, income source |
| Viewing | Answer questions about the unit | Personal questions "to chat" |
| Verifications | Credit + references with consent | Unequal checks based on impression |
| Decision | Documented objective criteria | Vague or protected-ground reason |
This rigour benefits the owner first: it turns an emotional decision into a defensible one. And once the tenant is chosen, the work continues with a well-drafted lease and a properly completed Section F, which set the rules for the whole tenancy.
Reading and interpreting a credit report
Obtaining consent and ordering the check is only half the job. You still need to know how to read the report without drawing hasty or discriminatory conclusions. A credit report contains more than a single number: it describes a payment behaviour over several years. It's that story, more than the isolated score, that tells you about a future tenant's reliability.
The credit score: a 300 to 900 scale
In Canada, the credit score produced by assessment agencies generally ranges from 300 to 900, with 900 the top. According to Equifax Canada, a score of 660 to 724 is considered "good," 725 to 759 "very good," and 760 and up "excellent." Lenders generally see a score of 660 and up as that of a lower-risk borrower.
These thresholds are designed for credit, not for renting. An applicant at 640 isn't necessarily a bad tenant: they may have a short credit history (newcomer, young adult) or a freshly rebuilt file. The score is a clue, not a verdict. That's why you must look beyond the number.
| Range (Equifax Canada) | Rating | Reading for a landlord |
|---|---|---|
| 760 – 900 | Excellent | Very low risk; solid history |
| 725 – 759 | Very good | Reassuring profile |
| 660 – 724 | Good | Generally reliable |
| Below 660 | To examine | Dig deeper: cause, file age, trend |
Source of the ranges: Equifax Canada — What Is a Good Credit Score.
What to look at beyond the score
The real value of a report lies in the detail. Here are the most telling elements for a landlord:
- Payment history: repeated late payments on cards or loans speak louder than a score. On-time payment, month after month, is the best predictor of rent paid on time.
- Credit utilization: someone constantly near their limits may lack a cushion for the unexpected.
- Collections and judgments: a debt sent to collection, especially from a former landlord, warrants a frank conversation.
- Account age: a recent file often explains a modest score without reflecting real risk.
Careful: the credit report must never be a back door to discriminate. You cannot, for instance, reject an applicant because their file indirectly reveals they receive benefits. The report serves to assess solvency and payment history, nothing more.
Mistakes to avoid with the credit report
- Rejecting mechanically below a score threshold, without examining the context.
- Keeping the report indefinitely "just in case."
- Sharing the report with an unauthorized third party.
- Requiring the SIN to "speed up" the check — it isn't required.
Checking references without crossing the line
References from former landlords are, alongside the credit check, the most useful tool — and often the most neglected. A credit file tells you whether the person pays their debts; a former landlord tells you how they behave as a tenant: rent punctuality, care of the unit, respect for neighbours, communication. You just have to ask the right questions and avoid those touching a protected ground.
Legitimate questions to ask a former landlord
Stay focused on the rental relationship and verifiable facts:
- Was the rent paid on time? Were there late payments or NSF cheques?
- Was the unit kept in good condition?
- Were there neighbour complaints or disturbances?
- Was proper notice of departure given?
- Would you rent to this person again?
That last question is often the most revealing: a hesitation says a lot. Note that you need the applicant's consent to contact these references, and must collect only relevant information. Éducaloi reminds landlords to limit themselves to information useful to the rental relationship.
Questions never to ask
A former landlord might, in good faith, volunteer sensitive information. It's up to you not to solicit it and not to use it:
Off-limits, even with a third party
- "Did they have children?" (civil status)
- "Where are they from?" (origin)
- "Were they on social assistance?" (social condition)
- "What was their religion?"
Beware of fake references
An applicant with a weak file may provide a friend's number posing as a former landlord. A few reflexes limit the risk: ask for the building's name and cross-check it against the municipal assessment roll (public), ask precise questions a real landlord would know (rent amount, lease length), and be wary of an overly perfect, eager reference. Reference checks, done seriously, often separate two files that looked equivalent on paper.
Social condition: the most misunderstood ground
Of all the grounds in section 10 of the Charter, social condition is the one that most often traps well-meaning landlords. Unlike origin or religion, whose discriminatory character is obvious, social condition hides behind practices that seem purely financial and "reasonable." That's precisely what makes it dangerous.
What does "social condition" cover?
Social condition refers to the rank a person holds in society due, in particular, to their income, occupation or level of education. In housing, it protects low-income people, social assistance recipients, students, assisted persons and precarious workers. Refusing someone because they belong to one of these categories is prohibited discrimination.
The most common traps
- "I don't rent to people on welfare." Refusal based directly on social assistance: illegal.
- A rigid income threshold. Requiring income of "3× the rent" and applying that threshold absolutely can systematically exclude low incomes — a discriminatory effect, even without intent.
- Refusing government cheques. Treating a legitimate benefit as second-class income amounts to targeting social condition.
- "Proof of employment required." Excluding outright a person without salaried employment, when they have other legitimate income, is problematic.
| Practice | Stated intent | Actual effect |
|---|---|---|
| "3× rent" threshold applied mechanically | Assess solvency | Excludes low incomes and recipients: discriminatory risk |
| "Salaried employment required" | Guarantee stable income | Excludes self-employed, retirees, assisted persons |
| Refusing benefits as income | Financial prudence | Targets social condition |
| Assessing real ability, all sources | Assess solvency | Compliant and defensible |
The dividing line is subtle but essential: you have the right to assess whether a person can concretely pay, but not to exclude them because they belong to an economically disadvantaged category. A social assistance recipient whose budget comfortably covers the rent is as valid a tenant as any other. A heavily indebted salaried worker may be riskier. Judge the real situation, not the label.
When in doubt, prudence calls for documenting an objective, non-financial reason for preferring another applicant (better payment history, stronger references). That trace is what protects you if the decision is challenged before the CDPDJ.
Ability to pay: three worked examples
Nothing beats concrete cases to grasp the difference between assessing a real ability to pay and discriminating on social condition. The figures below are teaching illustrations; they show how to reason without falling into the trap of a mechanical threshold. The "30% of income" rule serves as a management benchmark, never a legal guillotine.
Example 1 — The indebted salaried worker
Julie earns $4,000 net per month for a rent of $1,200: her rent is 30% of income, within the "norm." But her credit report shows $1,500 in monthly debt payments and a card used at 95%. After her obligations, her real cushion is thin. On paper she "passes" the threshold; in reality, her ability to pay is fragile. Lesson: the 30% ratio says nothing about the rest of the budget.
Example 2 — The recipient with a balanced budget
Marc receives benefits and a housing allowance totalling $1,900 per month; the rent is $750, about 39% of his income — above the famous 30%. He has no debt, an impeccable payment history and two former landlords who warmly recommend him. Rejecting him in the name of the 30% threshold would amount to discriminating on social condition, while his real ability to pay is excellent. Lesson: a higher ratio is not grounds for refusal when the budget is healthy.
Example 3 — The self-employed worker
Sophie is a freelance graphic designer; her income varies from $3,000 to $5,500 per month. No classic pay stub, but two years of notices of assessment and regular bank statements, no late payments, a good credit score. Her average income easily covers the $1,350 rent. Requiring "salaried employment" would have wrongly excluded her. Lesson: stability is demonstrated in ways other than a pay stub.
| Applicant | Income / rent | Ratio | Real ability |
|---|---|---|---|
| Julie (salaried) | $4,000 / $1,200 | 30% | Fragile (high debt) |
| Marc (recipient) | $1,900 / $750 | ≈ 39% | Solid (no debt) |
| Sophie (self-employed) | ≈ $4,250 / $1,350 | ≈ 32% | Solid (demonstrated income) |
The moral of these three cases: the 30% ratio is a starting point, not a conclusion. The right question is never "what category does this person belong to?" but "given their whole budget and history, can they reliably pay this rent?" That approach, both fairer and more rigorous, protects your plex and respects the Charter.
Keeping and destroying applicant files (Law 25)
Screening doesn't end when you pick the tenant: you're left with the files of all applicants, chosen and rejected. These files contain sensitive personal information — credit reports, contact details, income. Since Quebec modernized its rules (known as "Law 25"), their handling is regulated, and a lapse can be costly.
The principle: destroy once the purpose is achieved
Law 25, whose main provisions have been in force since September 22, 2023, requires that a personal information item be destroyed or anonymized once the purpose of its collection is achieved. For a rejected applicant, that purpose — assessing their application — disappears as soon as the unit is rented to someone else. You then have no reason to keep their credit report.
Sources: Access to Information Commission — Main changes under Law 25 and Québec.ca — Coming into force of Law 25 provisions.
Concrete best practices
- Collect the minimum: the less you collect, the less you have to protect.
- Secure the files: paper documents under lock, digital files password-protected.
- Destroy rejected applicants' files once the rental is concluded (shredding, secure deletion).
- Don't share a credit report with an unauthorized third party.
- Keep the chosen tenant's file for the duration of the tenancy, then destroy it at its end.
A simple reflex
- Unit rented? Destroy the other applicants' files.
- Keep only what serves the relationship with the chosen tenant.
- When in doubt, keeping less is always safer.
Beyond the legal obligation, it's a matter of trust and professionalism: an applicant who entrusted you with their file expects it to be handled with care. Clean management of personal information spares you both a complaint to the Access to Information Commission and a poor local reputation.
Special cases: student, newcomer, self-employed, guarantor
"Atypical" files are where owners make the most mistakes — often out of excess caution. An applicant with no local credit history or classic pay stub isn't a bad applicant; they simply need other ways to demonstrate reliability. Here's how to approach the most common profiles.
The student
A student rarely has a long credit history or high income. That doesn't justify an automatic refusal — age is a protected ground. You can instead consider proof of enrolment, part-time employment income, savings, or the presence of a guarantor (co-signer). What matters is applying the same real-ability-to-pay logic.
The newcomer
A person recently arrived in the country has no Canadian credit file yet. Careful: refusing on this basis can touch national origin. You can ask for other proof of solvency — an employment contract, bank statements, the first month's rent payable normally (never a prohibited security deposit). Never confuse "no Canadian history" with "bad payer."
The self-employed worker
Without a pay stub, the self-employed worker demonstrates stability otherwise: notices of assessment for the last two years, financial statements, regular bank statements, current contracts. Their credit score and payment history remain fully valid indicators. Requiring "salaried employment" would wrongly exclude them.
The guarantor (co-signer)
Using a guarantor is a legitimate way to secure a thinner file, often used for students or young tenants. The guarantor undertakes to answer for the tenant's obligations. Their own solvency may then be verified, with their consent, under the same rules. Voluntarily offering a guarantor is a sign of seriousness; requiring one selectively, only for certain categories of people, would be discriminatory.
| Profile | Alternative proof of reliability | Trap to avoid |
|---|---|---|
| Student | Enrolment, part-time job, savings, guarantor | Refusal tied to age |
| Newcomer | Employment contract, bank statements | Refusal tied to origin |
| Self-employed | Notices of assessment, financial statements | Requiring salaried employment |
| Thin file + guarantor | Guarantor's solvency (with consent) | Requiring a guarantor selectively |
In all these cases, the common thread is the same: look for objective proof of ability to pay suited to the profile, rather than mechanically excluding whatever doesn't fit the mould. That's how you widen your pool of good tenants while respecting the law.
Common landlord mistakes
- Reusing an old rental form that asks for the SIN or civil status — often illegal today.
- Requiring a security deposit "for peace of mind": prohibited in Quebec.
- Running a credit check without written consent, or keeping the report indefinitely.
- Excluding social assistance recipients by default: discrimination on social condition.
- Asking personal questions (religion, plans for children, country of origin) during the viewing.
In short: verify what relates to ability to pay and history, obtain consent, apply the same criteria to everyone, and ban anything touching a Charter-protected ground. That's how you screen a tenant both effectively and legally. Prefer to delegate? See our rental and tenant-placement service.
