THE HISTORY OF EVICTION Ancient and Pre-Modern Roots The concept of eviction is as old as the idea of land ownership itself. In ancient societies Mesopotamia, Rome, Egypt those who controlled land held near-absolute power over those who worked it. Tenants, serfs, and labourers had virtually no legal recourse. If a tenant didn't pay rent, the landlord could evict them and even seize whatever property or household goods they had. Landlords usually had armed men working for them, while tenants had no such resources or legal standing. Feudalism and English Common Law Eviction law has deep historical roots tracing back to English common law, which established fundamental principles of property rights and tenancy. The migration of these concepts to the United States laid the groundwork for modern landlord-tenant relations. Originally, concepts like estates and leases were introduced, forming the basis of today's eviction practices. The formal start of English real property law came after the Norman Invasion of 1066, when a common law was built throughout England. Under the feudal system, lords held land and tenants owed labour, military service, or rent in exchange for occupying it. There was no meaningful concept of tenant rights eviction was simply the lord's prerogative. The Magna Carta of 1215 offered some civil protections, but these applied only to barons and lords, not to ordinary tenants or serfs. The legal term used for eviction in this era was "ejectment" a formal claim by a landowner to remove someone from the land. By around 1500, this ejectment action had become available against virtually all parties occupying land without the owner's sanction. COVID-19 Moratoriums: Costs Borne by Private Owners The pandemic moratoriums of 2020–2021 illustrated the tension clearly. While the public health rationale was understandable, the financial burden of keeping non-paying tenants housed was placed almost entirely on private landlords particularly small, independent owners rather than on government directly. Many landlords went months or years without rental income, yet their costs did not pause. The experience renewed calls, from landlord advocates, for greater state rental assistance programs that compensate owners fairly when public policy restricts their ability to manage their own properties
The Scale of the Eviction Problem Eviction is not a rare or isolated event in the United States it is a systemic crisis embedded in the fabric of the rental market. Every year, 3.6 million people across the country experience eviction filings, disproportionately affecting Black and Latinx women. These numbers represent more than court dates and moving vans they represent broken households, disrupted children's schooling, damaged credit, and long-term housing insecurity. The Eviction Lab at Princeton University estimated 7.8 evictions were filed per 100 renting households nationally in 2018, based on available court record data and statistical modelling. More recently, landlords filed just over one million eviction cases in 2024 in the jurisdictions tracked by Eviction Lab's Eviction Tracking System. The financial consequences for landlords are severe. The average eviction costs property managers between $3,500 and $10,000 total, including legal fees, lost rent during the two-to-three month process, and property turnover expenses. Yet most landlords focus only on the visible court costs, severely underestimating the true burden. Direct legal costs for evictions typically range from $600 to $2,000 for uncontested cases and $2,000 to $10,000 or more for contested cases. The lesson embedded in these numbers is straightforward: the most effective way to avoid eviction costs is to avoid the eviction itself and that begins with rigorous tenant screening. Texas: A Case Study in Rising Evictions While eviction trends are a national concern, Texas provides a compelling and well-documented illustration of what happens when screening is inadequate and housing costs outpace tenant incomes. Landlords filed more than 177,000 eviction cases in the Houston, Dallas, Austin, and Fort Worth areas in 2023, according to records tracked by Eviction Lab. The trend has only accelerated. According to Princeton University's Eviction Lab, there have been almost 83,000 eviction filings in the past year for Houston alone a 42% increase when compared with the average pre-pandemic level. Houston renters experienced a large increase in their filing rate, from 6.9% to 9.2%, amounting to 20,000 additional eviction filings equivalent to the total number of evictions filed in all of Tampa in a year. The data from San Antonio (Bexar County) is equally striking. 27,012 eviction cases were filed against Bexar County households in 2024, which equates to approximately 9 in every 100 Bexar County renter households. The root causes are instructive. Cities in Texas were once among the more affordable in the country that is no longer the case. Renters are facing a new reality, with rising costs and limited legal protections. Across all justice of the peace precincts in Harris County, over 45% of renter households are "cost-burdened," meaning they spend 30% or more of their monthly income on rent. What applies to Texas applies broadly: when rent becomes unaffordable and screening fails to identify financially vulnerable applicants before a lease is signed, evictions follow. The Role of Tenant Screening in Preventing Evictions
- Screening Is the First Line of Defence 90 percent of landlords use background checks that compile rental, credit, employment, income, and criminal histories into a simplified score or recommendation. Done well, this process filters out applicants who are statistically likely to default. Done poorly or not at all it invites expensive and emotionally draining outcomes. If an applicant has an eviction on their record, that is the single best indicator they will default again. A prior completed eviction represents someone who pushed a tenancy to the absolute legal limit, forcing a landlord through court appearances, attorney fees, and sheriff involvement.
- Income Verification: The Most Reliable Predictor The most universally applicable screening criterion is income verification. Most Texas landlords require an income of 2.5 to 3 times the monthly rent, which is legally defensible as objective financial criteria. This standard widely used across the country is rooted in a simple principle: a tenant who spends no more than one-third of their income on rent has enough financial cushion to weather unexpected expenses without defaulting. Landlords should require recent pay stubs, W-2 forms, or tax returns to verify income. For gig workers or self-employed applicants, bank statements spanning several months offer a more reliable picture than a single pay stub.
- Credit History: Look for Patterns, Not Just Scores A credit report reveals not just a score but a story. Patterns of missed payments, high utilization, collections, and judgments often precede rental default. A credit risk score is a projection of whether the credit bureau anticipates an individual may become delinquent within the next 24 months. However, landlords should read credit reports contextually. A medical debt collection is very different from a history of skipped rent payments. Consistent, on-time payments on car loans and utilities often indicate someone who prioritizes recurring obligations exactly what a landlord needs.
- Eviction History: Check Carefully, Interpret Thoughtfully Searching eviction records is one of the most important steps, but it requires nuance. Eviction filings don't always result in judgments against tenants. In Washington, D.C., in 2018, only 5.5% of eviction filings led to a formal eviction. Other cases were dropped, the parties came to an agreement, the tenant won, or the landlord was in the wrong. This matters because eviction records remain easily accessible to the public and tenant screening companies, even when the filing does not lead to an actual, completed eviction, or is resolved in the tenant's favour. Inaccuracies appear in 22% of eviction records. In Texas, landlords can deny an applicant due to a history of evictions, but should only screen for recent evictions usually within seven years. This same guideline applies in most jurisdictions and strikes a fair balance between protecting landlords and not permanently blacklisting tenants for old situations.
- Rental History and Landlord References Prior landlords are often the most candid source of insight about a prospective tenant. A direct phone call not just an email to a previous landlord can reveal patterns of late payment, property damage, complaints from neighbours, and how the tenant left the unit. Verify that the reference provided is actually a prior landlord and not a friend or family member. Cross-check addresses provided with the background report to confirm consistency.
- Criminal Background Checks: Apply Fairly and Consistently Criminal history is a permitted screening criterion in most states, but it must be applied with care. Landlords cannot automatically reject someone because they have a criminal record. Each case must be evaluated individually, focusing on recent and relevant convictions typically within the last four to seven years. Federal Fair Housing Act guidance from HUD requires a case-by-case assessment. Blanket bans on renting to anyone with a criminal record can expose landlords to discrimination liability, particularly where such policies have a disproportionate impact on protected classes.
HOW TO BUILD A CONSISTANT SCREENING PROCESS Consistency is not just a best practice it is a legal requirement. Applying different standards to different applicants exposes landlords to fair housing violations. Every step of the screening process should be documented and identical for all applicants. A defensible screening process includes: Written criteria disclosed before application fees are collected. In Texas, this is required by law. Texas state law requires landlords to disclose tenant screening criteria before applicants pay fees, and to refund fees if applicants are denied based on undisclosed criteria. Similar transparency requirements are spreading to other states. Consistent income thresholds applied to every applicant regardless of background. A clear eviction policy that distinguishes between filed-but-dismissed cases and actual judgments. Written denial notices. If a landlord denies an applicant, a written notice must be sent explaining which criteria the applicant did not meet, which screening company was used, and how the applicant can dispute errors in their background report. The Problem With Algorithmic Screening Reports The tenant screening industry has grown enormously. Some of the biggest tenant screening companies include RealPage, TransUnion Smart Move, Rent Grow, CoreLogic My Rental, Rent Prep, and Experian Connect. These services can generate reports in minutes, but landlords should treat them as a starting point, not a final verdict. Research shows landlords overwhelmingly use tenant screening reports to make leasing decisions that affect housing access, yet the proprietary nature of these datasets leads to a lack of transparency in the accuracy and quality of the data provided. Several states and local jurisdictions are working to require that courts expunge or seal incomplete eviction records so that landlords cannot access them during the application process. California, Minnesota, Nevada, and Oregon have all enacted related reforms. Landlords who rely purely on automated recommendations without understanding what data underlies them may inadvertently discriminate or simply make bad decisions based on inaccurate records.
Prevention Beyond Screening: What Happens After Move-In Effective screening reduces the risk of eviction, but it does not eliminate it entirely. Life circumstances change job loss, illness, divorce and even excellent tenants can fall into hardship. Landlords who maintain open communication channels, respond quickly to maintenance issues, and proactively offer payment plans when tenants hit rough patches see dramatically fewer evictions than those who treat the landlord-tenant relationship as purely transactional. Offering a cash-for-keys agreement when appropriate can sometimes be faster and cheaper than a full eviction a small payout can save time, cost, and stress, helping both sides move on peacefully. The data from Texas and across the country points to the same conclusion: research published in PNAS estimates 2.7 million households face eviction threats annually in the United States. The landlords who avoid becoming part of that statistic are overwhelmingly those who screen carefully, document thoroughly, and treat tenants with transparency from the first application to the last day of tenancy.
