Login
iscover
Does the Australian rental system require a data overhaul to ensure the cyber security of its tenants?
New research from the Tenants Union of NSW (TUNSW) has indicated an increasingly tightening rental market has resulted in many tenants parting with an increased amount of personal information to ensure they secure a roof over their head.
While noting that “some basic information and documentation are required for a landlord or their agent to confirm someone’s identity, and be able to make an informed decision about an applicant’s capacity to pay and meet the obligation of their tenancy agreement,” the body reported that “the amount of information requested from renters when applying for a property seems to be expanding.”
A survey of 124 renters conducted by the union from January to March 2023 revealed:
- Around 98.4 per cent provided a rental provider with their licence, 82 per cent handed over their Medicare card, and 73 per cent offered their passport.
- A large portion provided additional forms of identification including proof of marital status (54 per cent), and car registration (59.7 per cent).
- Information about capacity to pay provided by tenants included payslips (90.3 per cent), bank statements (81.5 per cent), and Centrelink documents (27.4 per cent).
Tenant testimony included in the survey’s findings revealed tenants have been asked for up to three years of bank statements, with one respondent espousing their belief that their financial history is “nobody’s business.”
Interestingly, just under 40 per cent of applicants have been asked if they’ve ever taken a previous landlord to Tribunal, a line of questioning labelled by one respondent as “offensive.”
When it comes to character references, 74.2 per cent have been asked for their current employers, 76.6 per cent for a personal reference, while just over 10 per cent have been asked for their social media profiles.
An overwhelming majority (91.7 per cent) of Australian renters felt pressured into sharing personal information they felt uncomfortable with their landlord having, while 41.3 per cent believe they missed out on a rental property due to refusing to part with requested personal information.
One respondent explained, “I do not feel that I have a choice. If I want to not be homeless, I need to give them what they want.”
Another simply stated: “I need housing. I never felt as though I was in a position to be able to refuse.”
Given recent history suggesting not even some of Australia’s largest corporations are safe from cyber security scams — with NAB and Harcourts, amongst others falling victim at the end of 2022 — it begs the question: Are tenants parting with too much data? And if so, what can be done about it?
Presently, no clear and consistent protections are in place to ensure tenants’ information is stored safely and their privacy is protected.
The former NSW Minister for Digital, Victor Dominello, had previously stated that “there definitely needs to be a rethink of what information we absolutely need to share, how long that information is shared for, and when that information should be destroyed.”
Leading up to last month’s state election, which resulted in a Labor victory, both major political parties in NSW pledged closer analysis at data breach and privacy concerns raised during the rental process, looking specifically at “what kind of regulation is needed to ensure the data and personal information being collected from renters is stored securely and appropriately protected.”
Additionally, the NSW Fair Trading Commissioner recently published guidance for agents on how renters’ personal information should be stored, used, and destroyed.
However, the TUNSW believes cyber security risks are just one fraction of the much larger conversation which needs to be had, which envelopes what kinds of information is necessary and appropriate for landlords and their agents to request from rental applicants.
“With no limits in the law or regulation on what can be requested, or how decisions are to be made, renters are being asked to provide inappropriate, excessive, and sometimes quite sensitive personal information.”
According to the TUNSW, “This ongoing creep of information comes from the application process itself being a competitive site, where people are judged against each other, rather than on something like their need for a home or even just straightforward assessment of ‘Can they afford this property?’”
It concluded this approach, which it billed as “unlike any other essential service,” is the primary driver of “judgements about all sorts of personal and financial characteristics.”
Newsletter
