--- name: rental-application-experience type: experience journey: customer persona: Prospective tenant (26), relocating for work domain: Housing · lettings technology: Responsive web core: "1.0" description: "Experience skill: Applying to rent a home with fair, published criteria — the best-practice customer journey for a prospective tenant (26), relocating for work in Housing · lettings on Responsive web. Use when designing, building, reviewing or writing copy for any step of this journey. Brand-agnostic: pair with any Celestial design skill for the look. Also use it for decks, research readouts, specs and documents about this journey. Outputs: PowerPoint / Keynote / Google Slides decks, Word and Google Docs documents, PDF reports, emails, social posts, charts and diagrams." --- # Applying to rent a home with fair, published criteria A prospective tenant sees the criteria before applying, adds references and consents to checks, and receives a decision with reasons. **Outcome** — An applicant sees every criterion before paying or sharing data and receives a decision with stated reasons within 5 working days. This skill says *what happens and in what order*. It never specifies colour, type or spacing: describe screens as compositions of Celestial core v1.0 components and patterns, and let the active design skill render them. --- ## Persona — Lin, Prospective tenant (26), relocating for work > “I don't mind being checked. I mind not knowing what you're checking or why I was turned down.” Moving cities for a new hospital job; has no local rental history and a new employment contract. **Goals** - Know before applying whether she meets the criteria - Show income through her new contract - Get a fast, fair answer **Pains** - Hidden fees and vague criteria - Being asked for a previous landlord she doesn't have - Silence after sharing sensitive documents **Behaviours** - Applies to several homes in one week - Applies on her phone between shifts - Saves documents in one folder to reuse **Access needs** - Colour vision deficiency — status must not rely on colour --- ## Domain — Housing · lettings - Publish all screening criteria (income ratio, checks, pets, occupancy) before the applicant provides data or pays anything - Apply the same criteria to every applicant; never screen on protected characteristics under fair housing and equality law - Show all fees and deposits up front and follow local limits on application fees and holding deposits - Get explicit consent before credit, identity or reference checks, naming who runs each check - If declined because of a check, give the reason and how to see or dispute the report (adverse action notice) Vocabulary to use: `application`, `reference`, `guarantor`, `holding deposit`, `income ratio`, `adverse action notice` ## Technology — Responsive web Inputs: Touch, Camera for document photos, Keyboard - Reference requests sent by email with a secure single-use link - Documents encrypted at rest and deleted 6 months after an unsuccessful decision - Integrates with a credit-check provider only after recorded consent --- ## Journey (6 steps) | # | Step | Goal | Compose with | Copy | |---|---|---|---|---| | 1 | **Criteria** | See what is checked and what it costs before applying | `detail` | “To rent here, household income should be about 2.5× the rent: £3,000 a month” | | 2 | **Your details** | Give household, income and move date | `form` | “When would you like to move in?” | | 3 | **References** | Add people who can vouch for you | `form + chips` | “Who can we ask for a reference?” | | 4 | **Checks consent** | Agree to the checks with full knowledge | `form` | “I agree to a credit check by Fairline Checks Ltd” | | 5 | **Submit** | Send the application and know the timeline | `confirmation` | “Application sent. You'll have a decision by Wednesday 29 October” | | 6 | **Decision** | Hear the outcome and the reasons | `inbox` | “We can't offer this home because the income criterion wasn't met. Here's how to ask about it” | ### 1. Criteria - All criteria and fees on one screen - Alternatives stated: guarantor, larger deposit where lawful ### 2. Your details - Ask only what the criteria use - Accept an offer letter or contract as income evidence - **error:** Enter a date after today ### 3. References - Offer reference types: previous landlord, employer, character - Show each reference's status as it changes - **empty:** No previous landlord? Add an employer or a guarantor instead ### 4. Checks consent - Each check named with provider and what it shows - Consent is a separate, unticked choice ### 5. Submit - Restate fee paid, references pending and decision date - Explain how to withdraw ### 6. Decision - Declines state the criterion not met and how to dispute - Approvals give next steps and deadlines --- ## Principles 1. Criteria visible before data or money 2. Same rules for every applicant, applied the same way 3. Consent before every check 4. Every decision comes with a reason 5. Keep and delete data on a published schedule ## Do / Don't **Do** - Show the income ratio as an actual amount - Offer alternatives to a landlord reference - Tell the applicant when each reference responds **Don't** - Ask about family plans, religion or nationality beyond legal right-to-rent checks - Charge a fee before showing criteria - Decline without a reason ## Accessibility - Meets WCAG 2.2 AA; reference status shown with text labels and icons, not colour alone (1.4.1) - Consent checkboxes are separate, labelled and unticked (3.3.2) - Document upload works with keyboard and screen reader - Focus moves to the first error with a linked error summary Core minimums always apply: 4.5:1 text, 3:1 UI and focus, visible focus on every control, 44px touch targets, no meaning by colour alone, reduced motion respected. ## Content and voice - Name every party: “Fairline Checks Ltd will see your credit file” - Give money as amounts: “Holding deposit: £230, returned if…” - Decisions are factual and respectful: “The income criterion wasn't met” not “You failed” ## AI interactions - No AI in screening or decisions because tenancy decisions must be explainable and free from proxy discrimination; a person applies the published criteria ## Edge cases - Reference never replies — remind once, then let the applicant swap the referee - Two applicants meet criteria — published tie-break rule (e.g. first complete application) applied and stated - Applicant uses a housing voucher or benefit — treat as income where the law requires - Applicant disputes a credit report — pause decision and explain how to correct it - Home let to someone else mid-application — stop, refund any lawful fee, delete data on request --- ## Measures | Measure | Target | How | |---|---|---| | Criteria viewed before applying | 100% | Applications where criteria screen was shown first | | Decision time | ≤ 5 working days | Median, submit → decision | | Declines with reasons | 100% | Decline notices that name the criterion | | Applicant trust | ≥ 80% | Post-decision question “The process was fair”, including declined applicants | Research: Interviews with renters who have thin or no rental history; Fair housing legal review of criteria and decline copy; Usability test of reference and consent steps on phones. --- When building this journey: follow the steps in order, compose each screen from core components and patterns only, keep the persona's access needs and the domain rules non-negotiable, and take every visual value from the active design skill. ## Using this journey in other outputs - **Deck or readout**: one slide for the persona (name, role, quote, goals, pains), one per step (goal, screen, the principle that matters most, its error state), then measures with targets. 16:9. - **Spec or document**: a section per step with goal, screen composition, copy, states and acceptance criteria; principles and accessibility rules as a checklist at the end. - **Look and feel**: this skill is brand-agnostic. If a design skill is named or installed (e.g. "in Mars"), take every colour, font and shape from it; otherwise use plain neutral styling and say which design skill would apply.